Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2001 11:13:41 +0100 From: Mark Drayton <mark.drayton@izr.com> To: Greg Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Vinum mirrored/striped confusion Message-ID: <20010714111341.B63502@drex.staff.izr.com> In-Reply-To: <20010714092821.F99931@wantadilla.lemis.com>; from grog@FreeBSD.org on Sat, Jul 14, 2001 at 09:28:21AM %2B0930 References: <20010714004038.A58799@drex.staff.izr.com> <20010714092821.F99931@wantadilla.lemis.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Greg Lehey (grog@FreeBSD.org) wrote: > On Saturday, 14 July 2001 at 0:40:39 +0100, Mark Drayton wrote: > > > > I don't quite understand why mirroring two plexes containing the > > same subdisks is beneficial. What happens if, say, disk 1 fails? > > If you mean d1, then you'll lose the first 512 MB of plex 0 and the > last 512 MB of plex 1. These parts of the volume will no longer be > mirrored. Ah, I see now. > > I imagine both plexes will be faulty and the volume will be down > > This is incorrect. The volume will remain up. Excellent! I assumed a volume requires at least one 'up' plex to be up. Obviously this isn't the case. > > Aside from this possible difference, is one of these two setups > > going to perform better (for a mail server) than the other? > > Well, the second config only has half the storage :-) But if you made > those 1 GB subdisks, the performance should be comparable. Okay. Which of these configurations do you recommend? As far as I know, both configurations perform equally well, and a disk failure in either case will result in half the volume not being mirrored but with the volume remaining up. Is there any other pros/cons I should consider? Thanks very much, -- Mark Drayton izR Company Ltd To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010714111341.B63502>