Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 12:39:09 +0000 From: Steve O'Hara-Smith <steve@sohara.org> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS confusion Message-ID: <20140127123909.dd04175320e6d6dc5c64a08e@sohara.org> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1401271309090.4811@mail.fig.ol.no> References: <52E40C82.7050302@gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1401270944100.4811@mail.fig.ol.no> <52E62DFF.3010600@gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1401271149160.4811@mail.fig.ol.no> <52E6463C.6090805@gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1401271309090.4811@mail.fig.ol.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 13:12:02 +0100 (CET)
Trond Endrestøl <Trond.Endrestol@fagskolen.gjovik.no> wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 11:42-0000, Kaya Saman wrote:
>
> > It would be really good if raidz could be expandable, ie by adding
> > extra 'new' disks into the same vdev.
>
> It's there!
>
> Try: zpool attach <pool_name> <existing_member> <new_member1>
> [new_member2 ...]
No it is not - from man zpool:
=========================
zpool attach [-f] pool device new_device
Attaches new_device to an existing zpool device. The existing
device cannot be part of a raidz configuration.
==========================
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith <steve@sohara.org>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140127123909.dd04175320e6d6dc5c64a08e>