Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 14:22:21 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: Marco van Lienen <marco+freebsd-current@lordsith.net> Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] ZFS version 15 committed to head Message-ID: <20100718142221.00007932@unknown> In-Reply-To: <20100717105134.GB13626@lordsith.net> References: <4C3C7202.7090103@FreeBSD.org> <20100717101459.GA13626@lordsith.net> <9E4FCF4C-7A69-426E-9F39-B5487D4CB07C@lassitu.de> <20100717105134.GB13626@lordsith.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 12:51:34 +0200 Marco van Lienen <marco+freebsd-current@lordsith.net> wrote: > On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 12:25:56PM +0200, you (Stefan Bethke) sent > the following to the -current list: > > Am 17.07.2010 um 12:14 schrieb Marco van Lienen: > > > > > # zpool list pool1 > > > NAME SIZE USED AVAIL CAP HEALTH ALTROOT > > > pool1 5.44T 147K 5.44T 0% ONLINE - > > ... > > > zfs list however only shows: > > > # zfs list pool1 > > > NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT > > > pool1 91.9K 3.56T 28.0K /pool1 > > > > > > I just lost the space of an entire hdd! > > > > zpool always shows the raw capacity (without redundancy), zfs the > > actual available capacity. > > I have read many things about those differences, but why then does > zfs on opensolaris report more available space whereas FreeBSD does > not? That would imply that my friend running osol build 117 couldn't > fill up his raidz pool past the 3.56T. If you compare the yfs list output of OSol and FreeBSD and they differ where they shouldn't, you should have a look if compression and/or deduplication (were available) is activated. Bye, Alexander.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100718142221.00007932>