Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2010 12:51:34 +0200 From: Marco van Lienen <marco+freebsd-current@lordsith.net> To: Stefan Bethke <stb@lassitu.de> Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] ZFS version 15 committed to head Message-ID: <20100717105134.GB13626@lordsith.net> In-Reply-To: <9E4FCF4C-7A69-426E-9F39-B5487D4CB07C@lassitu.de> References: <4C3C7202.7090103@FreeBSD.org> <20100717101459.GA13626@lordsith.net> <9E4FCF4C-7A69-426E-9F39-B5487D4CB07C@lassitu.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--6sX45UoQRIJXqkqR Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 12:25:56PM +0200, you (Stefan Bethke) sent the foll= owing to the -current list: > Am 17.07.2010 um 12:14 schrieb Marco van Lienen: >=20 > > # zpool list pool1 > > NAME SIZE USED AVAIL CAP HEALTH ALTROOT > > pool1 5.44T 147K 5.44T 0% ONLINE - > ... > > zfs list however only shows: > > # zfs list pool1 > > NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT > > pool1 91.9K 3.56T 28.0K /pool1 > >=20 > > I just lost the space of an entire hdd! >=20 > zpool always shows the raw capacity (without redundancy), zfs the actual = available capacity. I have read many things about those differences, but why then does zfs on o= pensolaris report more available space whereas FreeBSD does not? That would imply that my friend running osol build 117 couldn't fill up his= raidz pool past the 3.56T. marco --6sX45UoQRIJXqkqR Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (FreeBSD) iEYEAREDAAYFAkxBizYACgkQjqALqIWA5ssr3QCbBLho/OGfLhCmBW5wJXxG+EVQ T+YAniB0uBLqY8c0D8jDjSUoXsDSv/yc =5SB4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --6sX45UoQRIJXqkqR--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100717105134.GB13626>