From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 6 23:24:54 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5D4B1065675 for ; Thu, 6 May 2010 23:24:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from andrew@modulus.org) Received: from email.octopus.com.au (email.octopus.com.au [122.100.2.232]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A1828FC13 for ; Thu, 6 May 2010 23:24:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by email.octopus.com.au (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 179C05CB955; Fri, 7 May 2010 09:13:36 +1000 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on email.octopus.com.au X-Spam-Level: **** X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.4 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS,FH_DATE_PAST_20XX autolearn=no version=3.2.3 Received: from [220.233.52.14] (14.52.233.220.static.exetel.com.au [220.233.52.14]) (Authenticated sender: admin@email.octopus.com.au) by email.octopus.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 418E05CB8EA; Fri, 7 May 2010 09:13:31 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <4BE34FBF.30007@modulus.org> Date: Fri, 07 May 2010 09:24:47 +1000 From: Andrew Snow User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100411) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Newman , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org References: <4BE33E40.6080905@networktest.com> <4BE34E52.7050407@modulus.org> <4BE34F21.6040806@networktest.com> In-Reply-To: <4BE34F21.6040806@networktest.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Re: Aligning VMware VMFS on ZFS X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 May 2010 23:24:54 -0000 David Newman wrote: > Thanks. So, just so I understand, you're saying there's no alignment > possible with VMFS on ZFS -- just ignore those messages and proceed? Yes: with simpler block storage storage systems you need to make sure you assign a LUN that is aligned on the underlying block device. But this is not applicable to ZFS with ZVOLs.