Il 06/11/2016 03:37, David Gossage ha scritto:
Ok, i'll try again. I'm not talking about a single RAIDZ1 for the whole server. Let's assume a 12 disks server. 4TB each. Raw space = 4TB*12 = 48TB You can do one of the following: 1) a single RAIDZ10, using all disks, made up by 6 RAIDZ1 mirrors. usable space=4TB*6 = 24TB 2) 6 RAIDZ1 mirrors. usable space=4TB*6 = 24TB You'll get the same usable space for both solution. Now you have gluster, so you have at least 2 more servers in "identical" configuration. With solution 1, you can loose only 1 disk for each pair. If you loose 2 disks from the same pair, you loose the whole RAIDZ10 and you have to heal 24TB from the network. With solution 2, you can loose the same number of disks, but if you loose 1 mirror at once, you only have to heal that mirror from the network, only 4TB. * IOPS should be the same, as Gluster will 'aggragate' each pair in a single volume, like a RAID10 does, but you get much more speed during an healing. * Resilvering time is the same, as ZFS has to resilver only the failed disk with both solutions. What i'm saying is to skip the "RAID0" part and use gluster as aggragator. Is much more secure and faster to recover in case of multiple failures. |
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users