Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:39:40 +0300 From: Dan Naumov <dan.naumov@gmail.com> To: Pete French <petefrench@ticketswitch.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Does this disk/filesystem layout look sane to you? Message-ID: <cf9b1ee00906150139g77725cdeu43a1a8d14cd99fa9@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <E1MG7ey-000KGX-5y@dilbert.ticketswitch.com> References: <cf9b1ee00906150102g6b1e3d93of25917c3e3128955@mail.gmail.com> <E1MG7ey-000KGX-5y@dilbert.ticketswitch.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Haven't had time to test (stuck at work), but I will trust your word :) Well, this sounds nice and sensible. I am curious though if there have been any numbers regarding how much do "actual" drive sizes vary in the real world when it comes to disks of same manufacturer/model/size. I guess this probably varies from manufacturer to manufacturer, but some average estimates would be nice, just so that one could evaluate whether this 64k barrier is enough. - Dan Naumov On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Pete French<petefrench@ticketswitch.com> wrote: >> If this is true, some magic has been done to the FreeBSD port of ZFS, >> because according to SUN documentation is is definitely not supposed >> to be possible. > > I just tried it again to make sure I wasn't imagining things - you > can give it a shot yourself using mdconfig to create some drives. It > will let me drop in a replacement up to about 64k smaller than the original > with no problems. Below that and it refuses saying the drive is too > small. > > -pete. >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?cf9b1ee00906150139g77725cdeu43a1a8d14cd99fa9>