[OpenIndiana-discuss] About zpools and usage plan

[Richard Elling]

On Aug 3, 2013, at 5:23 PM, Timothy Coalson <tsc5yc at mst.edu> wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 3:58 AM, Harry Putnam <reader at newsguy.com> wrote:
> 
>> "DormitionSkete at hotmail.com" <dormitionskete at hotmail.com> writes:
>> 
>>> On Aug 2, 2013, at 9:08 PM, Harry Putnam wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Looking for a little advice about setting up a home lan server.
>>>> 
>>>> So far just tinkering with a vbox oi as guest install hoping to make
>>>> whatever nasty blunders on disposable data and OS.
>>>> 
>>>> But getting right to it:
>>>> 
>>>> In a previous life I ran oi and used mirrored sets of discs for
>>>> everthing.
>>>> 
>>>> Mirrored OS discs, and 2 sets of mirrored data discs.
>>>> 
>>>> I was advised back then that mirrored sets of discs, given  my small
>>>> usage, would be the most secure (not meaning agains penitration or the
>>>> like...just keeping data from loss) and handiest way to handle my home
>>>> lan.
>>>> 
>>>> So, wondering what the current thinking is?  Like say, mirrored as
>>>> opposed to a collection of discs in raidz or whatever its called.
>>>> 
>>>> My needs will be well handled by something like 3tb of storage so
>>>> something like 6 1tb discs for a mirrored setup.
>>>> 
>>>> What else could I get with those 6 disks in terms of redundancy and ease
>>>> of maintenance?
>> 
>> They're a little weak in the snapshot area, and throw big sighs when
>> asked to scrub a disk.... hehe.
>> 
>> My question here was about the various ways of using a zfs box.
>> 
> 
> Richard Elling did some comparisons of vdev layouts, calculating mean time
> to data loss:

Yes, on my todo list is to update with more modern data. Look for something soon :-)
 -- richard

> 
> http://blog.richardelling.com/2010/02/zfs-data-protection-comparison.html
> 
> https://blogs.oracle.com/relling/entry/a_story_of_two_mttdl
> https://blogs.oracle.com/relling/entry/raid_recommendations_space_vs_mttdl
> 
> The pictures on the oracle blogs got botched, though they can be dug out
> (they reference the old sun url, but they did get moved to the new url).
> The short version is that while mirror pairs are safer than raidz1 for the
> same number of disks, raidz2 is safer than either (and more space efficient
> to boot - what you lose is some performance in random workloads).
> 
> Tim
> _______________________________________________
> OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list
> OpenIndiana-discuss at openindiana.org
> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss

-- 

ZFS storage and performance consulting at http://www.RichardElling.com