gvinum raid5 vs. ZFS raidz

[Daniel Staal]

--As of August 6, 2014 1:23:35 AM -0500, Scott Bennett is alleged to have 
said:

>      That would mean having/buying enough more space to be able to do
> that. Further, one would probably want to set up a new raidzN on those
> devices to hold all that output, so that one would not risk
> corrupting/losing one's data during the process.  And if one is going to
> do that, then why copy it back?  Growing it in place would eliminate that
> space requirement, perhaps saving the owner a considerable amount of
> money.  The only additional spindles needed would be the new ones to
> increase the space or raidz level.

--As for the rest, it is mine.

Agreed.  ;)  But I've seen it mentioned on pages talking about moving to 
new datasets (there are other reasons - notably the *other* way to grow a 
zfs pool, by adding vdevs, doesn't spread the IO across all the disks 
without it: writes go to the *empty* vdev by preference), and you can do 
things like store the zfs stream at a cloud provider for the duration of 
the exchange.

So I thought it was worth mentioning in this context, even if it wasn't 
exactly the same thing.

Daniel T. Staal

---------------------------------------------------------------
This email copyright the author.  Unless otherwise noted, you
are expressly allowed to retransmit, quote, or otherwise use
the contents for non-commercial purposes.  This copyright will
expire 5 years after the author's death, or in 30 years,
whichever is longer, unless such a period is in excess of
local copyright law.
---------------------------------------------------------------