3 ms·
That's basically why I've gone with raidz3, yeah. raid10 still allows a second drive failure to lose data, it's just less likely to be that specific paired driv
by Filligree 10y ago
That's basically why I've gone with raidz3, yeah. raid10 still allows a second drive failure to lose data, it's just less likely to be that specific paired drive.
- fnj 10y agoRAID-Z3, or a mirror of two RAID-Z2s for me, I have one of each. You can also do mirrors with more than just two elements.
- rb666 10y agoGood article here: http://jrs-s.net/2015/02/06/zfs-you-should-use-mirror-vdevs-not-raidz/ http://jrs-s.net/2015/02/06/zfs-you-should-use-mirror-vdevs-...
- Dylan16807 10y ago> The only disk more heavily loaded than usual during a mirror vdev resilvering is the other disk in the vdev – which might sound bad, but remember that it’s only being heavily loaded with reads, whereas all of the remaining disks in a RAIDZ vdev are being much more heavily loaded with writes as well as reads during a resilver. Why is that happening? There's no reason to perform a bunch of writes to those drives.