Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:53:57 +1000 From: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> To: "James R. Van Artsdalen" <james-freebsd-fs2@jrv.org> Cc: freebsd-fs <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Subject: Re: adding drive to raidz1 Message-ID: <20090620045357.GB22846@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <4A3B1020.2010305@jrv.org> References: <m2bpol6v8r.wl%randy@psg.com> <4A3B1020.2010305@jrv.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--kORqDWCi7qDJ0mEj Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2009-Jun-18 23:12:16 -0500, "James R. Van Artsdalen" <james-freebsd-fs2@= jrv.org> wrote: >As a feature suggestion why not reject an "zpool add" of a non-redundant >vdev to a pool of redundant vdev's unless -f is given? A command of >that sort is almost always a mistake so requiring -f would seem no >hardship for anyone... Agreed. >As was said, a vdev (ad7s1) cannot be removed from a pool, and a device >cannot be added to a raidz. Both these are unfortunate restrictions. I can understand that expanding a RAIDZ would be a fairly complex operation but it's probably the most requested feature. I'm surprised that Sun don't allow removing vdevs from a pool - it's orthogonal to adding a vdev to a pool and (eg) HP AdvFS allows both. --=20 Peter Jeremy --kORqDWCi7qDJ0mEj Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAko8a2UACgkQ/opHv/APuIegQACeMcKgN7KZbX7krZWTiNjDsU8e KXAAn1TKSqrhA0N14PhbCAyP0IGK97p0 =IfkF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --kORqDWCi7qDJ0mEj--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090620045357.GB22846>