Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 09:05:11 -0700 From: Shawn Webb <lattera@gmail.com> To: Christer Solskogen <christer.solskogen@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: ZFS / zpool size Message-ID: <CADt0fhxNOJA-haizkeT6t5BJpdfQMx041mOVNRM4K4P0w67Oyw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAMVU60ahgmyK60h83jN9r0VYAWROnMtuz5K_1db0_p=EUZUm5Q@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAMVU60ZtHp%2B_mhuUh-5RuLNW9XFRxBdfQxXu9vPEzw-P%2BrLUUw@mail.gmail.com> <CADt0fhyg8uXQG8SjWPL2DizZRNTdN9poRjo8Y=c62vN4W7iK6w@mail.gmail.com> <CAMVU60ahgmyK60h83jN9r0VYAWROnMtuz5K_1db0_p=EUZUm5Q@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I don't think so. On an OpenIndiana server I run, it shows almost a
full 1TB difference:
shawn@indianapolis:~$ zpool list tank
NAME SIZE ALLOC FREE CAP DEDUP HEALTH ALTROOT
tank 4.06T 1.62T 2.44T 39% 1.00x ONLINE -
shawn@indianapolis:~$ zfs list tank
NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT
tank 1.08T 1.58T 45.3K /tank
shawn@indianapolis:~$ zpool iostat tank
capacity operations bandwidth
pool alloc free read write read write
---------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----
tank 1.62T 2.44T 4 22 473K 165K
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Christer Solskogen
<christer.solskogen@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Shawn Webb <lattera@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The `zpool` command does not show all the overhead from ZFS. The `zfs`
>> command does. That's why the `zfs` command shows less available space
>> than the `zpool` command.
>>
>
> A overhead of almost 300GB? That seems a bit to much, don't you think?
> The pool consist of one vdev with two 1,5TB disks and one 3TB in raidz1.
>
> --
> chs,
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CADt0fhxNOJA-haizkeT6t5BJpdfQMx041mOVNRM4K4P0w67Oyw>