simple zfs query

krad kraduk at
Thu Mar 25 14:20:49 UTC 2010

On 25 March 2010 09:05, Matthew Seaman <m.seaman at>wrote:

> Hash: SHA1
> On 24/03/2010 21:23:54, krad wrote:
> > If you want 100% of the drives you could have a pool per drive. Its not
> as
> > nice as one big pool, but its less risky than one big raid0
> Errr... no it's not.  The risk of something going wrong is exactly the
> same.  The only advantage is that you may have less data to restore when
> things do go wrong.
>        Cheers,
>        Matthew
> - --
> Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.                   7 Priory Courtyard
>                                                  Flat 3
> PGP:     Ramsgate
>                                                  Kent, CT11 9PW
> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -
> tBkAnRA2ZcoGN/LwGaoY9gfkNkdOq6kE
> =O87f

That was my point. Less to restore, less risk of stuff being out of date or
corrupt. So less risk than a stripe. Marginal maybe i agree, but less all
the same.

You could also make copies=2 on the root pool fs if you are using one big
stripe, to try and reduce the risk. However this is more wasteful than raidz

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list