Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2013 19:18:45 +0300 From: Volodymyr Kostyrko <c.kworr@gmail.com> To: Quartz <quartz@sneakertech.com>, FreeBSD questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: ZFS: raid VS copies=n Message-ID: <51B207E5.70809@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51B201D4.3000705@sneakertech.com> References: <51B201D4.3000705@sneakertech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
07.06.2013 18:52, Quartz: > Question: > > How does the ZFS option 'copies=n' and raid relate to and interact with > each other? specifically recovery in the event of a failure. For > example, is having three disks in a raid-1 configuration with copies=1 > effectively the same as having three disks in a raid-0 with copies=3? > Are the copies distributed uniformly across all drives in the pool, or > concentrated, or what? What happens with configs like a raid-z2 with > copies=2? Which / how many disks can you lose? > > (I'm aware that like a lot of other ZFS options copies=n doesn't have to > be global to the entire pool / directory structure, but for the sake of > simplicity let's assume it is in this case). copies=n tries to allocate blocks on different disks but doesn't guarantee this nor that any single disk can be used to retrieve data. -- Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?51B207E5.70809>