Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 08:23:54 +0100 From: Ben Morrow <ben@morrow.me.uk> To: karl@denninger.net, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: getting to 4K disk blocks in ZFS Message-ID: <20140911072351.GA50786@anubis.morrow.me.uk> In-Reply-To: <54114217.9040403@denninger.net> References: <540FF3C4.6010305@ish.com.au> <54100258.2000505@freebsd.org> <5410F0B4.9040808@ish.com.au> <A0A549F7A4094F519A3660697AB4983F@multiplay.co.uk> <54114029.3060507@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoth Karl Denninger <karl@denninger.net>: > On 9/11/2014 1:24 AM, Andriy Gapon wrote: > > On 11/09/2014 04:22, Steven Hartland wrote: > >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Aristedes Maniatis" <ari@ish.com.au> > >>> Should the FreeBSD project change this minimum in the next release? > >>> There seems to be no downside and a huge amount of pain for people > >>> who stumble along with the defaults not knowing what a mess they are > >>> creating to solve later. > >> > >> The downside is wasted space which can be significant and hence when > >> I last suggested just this it was unfortunately rejected. > >> > >> We still maintain a local patch to our source tree which does just > >> this because, as you've mentioned, we don't want the pain so its > >> easier to just run everything as 4k. > > > > Another downside is 1/4th of uberblocks, 32 vs 128. Also, automatic > > sector size detection works great for me and I've never had a need > > to manually tweak ashift. > > > It works great until you start replacing older disks with new, larger > ones and find out that the new ones are 4k where the old ones were not..... Is there any way (short of building a new pool) to get a reasonable idea of how much extra space a given pool would use if converted? Ben
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140911072351.GA50786>