| 1 |
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Stefan G. Weichinger <lists@×××××.at>wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I have to set up a server w/ 8x 1TB in about 2 weeks and consider ZFS as |
| 4 |
> well, at least for data. So root-fs would go onto 2x 1TB hdds with |
| 5 |
> conventional partitioning and something like ext4. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> 6x 1TB would be available for data ... on one hand for a file-server |
| 8 |
> part ... on the other hand for VMs based on KVM. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
1TB drives are right on the border of switching from RAIDZ to RAIDZ2. |
| 12 |
You'll see people argue for both sides at this size, but the 'saner |
| 13 |
default' would be to use RAIDZ2. You're going to lose storage space, but |
| 14 |
gain an extra parity drive (think RAID6). Consumer grade hard drives are |
| 15 |
/going/ to fail during a resilver (Murphy's Law) and that extra parity |
| 16 |
drive is going to save your bacon. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I create |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
Douglas J Hunley (doug.hunley@×××××.com) |
| 22 |
Twitter: @hunleyd Web: |
| 23 |
douglasjhunley.com |
| 24 |
G+: http://goo.gl/sajR3 |
Archives