Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 14:11:40 +0100 (CET) From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Trond_Endrest=F8l?= <Trond.Endrestol@fagskolen.gjovik.no> To: "Steve O'Hara-Smith" <steve@sohara.org> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS confusion Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1401271410590.4811@mail.fig.ol.no> In-Reply-To: <20140127123909.dd04175320e6d6dc5c64a08e@sohara.org> 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> <20140127123909.dd04175320e6d6dc5c64a08e@sohara.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 12:39-0000, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote: > ========================= > 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. > ========================== My bad. -- +-------------------------------+------------------------------------+ | Vennlig hilsen, | Best regards, | | Trond Endrestøl, | Trond Endrestøl, | | IT-ansvarlig, | System administrator, | | Fagskolen Innlandet, | Gjøvik Technical College, Norway, | | tlf. mob. 952 62 567, | Cellular...: +47 952 62 567, | | sentralbord 61 14 54 00. | Switchboard: +47 61 14 54 00. | +-------------------------------+------------------------------------+ From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 27 13:13:32 2014 Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B89A19B for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 13:13:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qc0-x22f.google.com (mail-qc0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c01::22f]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9F2A1716 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 13:13:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qc0-f175.google.com with SMTP id x13so7800468qcv.6 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 05:13:30 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=u0FQtU3hCziwwe6KWWKlf8LXdipdPqwYaLBD8bvgsEk=; b=al4b6PiJ34F/7tCsSIoT2VvpNnFJsWanh2iOJD70rBnetjrjXho0JqLXzlRYjOFzEH /Rco1Yg6fPW5WwaYMvABrmwAxa20huYLDY76NtxyiWfbqE9yP7ZyWlBctcV2VkL+dKqQ g3bsGJad2h5RyovZMAx3CuhsugiLeJiG/VI1zcrxg1d3a7Bl16VZJI23bOui3d0NZtoV +43UWZp3ciHBN6DMY90BQgIvXCrx7P9NkxvHTlGSnso7xIXtffGHqc9tIHkB5ueCJkpK adMvnhLmjz9LWDlY8vYn2IuPewRyI4SK6zwE4rJuHJff2hrBqqL7ZOQLpDvBVBqjNL08 +HuA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.140.101.104 with SMTP id t95mr3699782qge.106.1390828410835; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 05:13:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.96.37.227 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Jan 2014 05:13:30 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52E6537F.8020907@gmail.com> 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> <52E6537F.8020907@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 13:13:30 +0000 Message-ID: <CALfReyeO0sOAHLp2y_FpxT-yAUoqSdrtdbjQG_EEOzNL33q1XQ@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: ZFS confusion From: krad <kraduk@gmail.com> To: Kaya Saman <kayasaman@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.17 Cc: freebsd-questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Trond_Endrest=F8l?= <Trond.Endrestol@fagskolen.gjovik.no> X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-questions>, <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/>; List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 13:13:32 -0000 Neither of these setups is ideal, The best practice for your vdev is to use 2^n + your parity drives This means in your case with raidz3 you would do something 2 + 3 4 + 3 8 + 3 the 1st two are far from ideal as the ratios are low 8 + 3, so 11 drives per raidz3 vdev would be optimal. This would fit nicely with your 26 drive enclosure as you would use 2x11 drive raidz3 vdevs, 2 hot spares, and two devices left for l2arc/zil. Probably best chop up the ssds, mirror the zil and stripe the l2arc, assuming you dont want to do down the route using generic SSD's rather than write/read optimized ones the reason you want 2^n for data drives is that each block/record stands a chance of being broken up into equal chunks and striped nice and neatly across the drives. 9 drives would give bad numbers with raidz3, as any data would be / 6 so 128 / 6 =3D 21.33333.. not ideal. However for raidz 9 is fine as it gives y= ou 8 data drives On 27 January 2014 12:39, Kaya Saman <kayasaman@gmail.com> wrote: > On 01/27/2014 12:12 PM, Trond Endrest=F8l wrote: > >> On Mon, 27 Jan 2014 11:42-0000, Kaya Saman wrote: >> >> Many thanks everyone (Trond, Dennis, Steve)!! >>> >>> So RAIDz2 or 3 is going to be preferred per the advice given. >>> >>> Now I just need to figure out how to make that work best with my curren= t >>> 5 >>> block of disks.... perhaps wait for a while then add some more disks i= n >>> the >>> mix then create the raidz(x) platform?? >>> >>> It would be really good if raidz could be expandable, ie by adding extr= a >>> 'new' >>> disks into the same vdev. >>> >> It's there! >> >> Try: zpool attach <pool_name> <existing_member> <new_member1> >> [new_member2 ...] >> >> >> > Yep, though of course as I'm just testing with temp files currently I was > unable to make it work: > > zpool attach test_pool /tmp/disk1 /tmp/disk6 > cannot attach /tmp/disk6 to /tmp/disk1: can only attach to mirrors and > top-level disks > > This is ok though as my block of 5 disks arrive tomorrow with the chassis > arriving either tomorrow or day after that. > > > Does 'attaching' create a hybrid raidz2/3 + 1 array or am I confusing > again? > > Being familiar with raid 1 and 0, I know that the attach command will > simply mirror a disk: > > zpool attach <pool> disk1 disk2 > > would create a raid1 mirror between the disks... is this the same > principle or does the command function differently in raidz? > > > Just checking out the man page gives this: > > > 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. If device is not > currently > part of a mirrored configuration, device automatically transform= s > into a two-way mirror of device and new_device. If device is > part of > a two-way mirror, attaching new_device creates a three-way mirro= r, > and so on. In either case, new_device begins to resilver > immediately. > > -- unless things have been updated since my FBSD version? > > > Regards, > > > Kaya > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions- > unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1401271410590.4811>