| 1 |
On Tue, 29 Jun 2021 15:56:49 +0200, Frank Steinmetzger wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I reached 80 % usage (which is the recommended maximum for ZFS) and am |
| 4 |
> now evaluating my options for the coming years. |
| 5 |
> 1) Reduce use of space by re-encoding. My payload is mainly movies, |
| 6 |
> among which are 3 TB of DVDs which can be shrunk by at least ⅔ by |
| 7 |
> re-encoding. → this takes time and computing effort, but is a long-term |
| 8 |
> goal anyway. 2) Replace all drives with bigger ones. There are three |
| 9 |
> counter arguments: |
| 10 |
> • 1000 € for four 10 TB drives (the biggest size available w/o |
| 11 |
> helium) |
| 12 |
> • they are only available with 7200 rpm (more power, noise and heat) |
| 13 |
> • I am left with four perfectly fine 6 TB drives |
| 14 |
> 3) Go for 4+2 RaidZ2. This requires a bigger case (with new PSU due to |
| 15 |
> different form factor) and a SATA expansion card b/c the Mobo only |
| 16 |
> has six connectors (I need at least one more for the system drive), |
| 17 |
> costing 250 € plus drives. |
| 18 |
> 4) Convert to RaidZ1. Gain space of one drive at the cost of |
| 19 |
> resilience. I can live with the latter; the server only runs |
| 20 |
> occasionally and not for very long at a time. *** This option brings me |
| 21 |
> to my question above, because it is easy to achieve and costs no €€€. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
5) (or 3a) Add an eSATA card and expand the RAID with external drives. |
| 24 |
That way you can stick with 6TB drives. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Bagpipe for free: Stuff cat under arm. Pull legs, chew tail. |
Archives