Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 14:29:33 +0300 From: "Andrew Pantyukhin" <infofarmer@FreeBSD.org> To: "Josef Karthauser" <joe@freebsd.org>, stable@freebsd.org, fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: gmirror disks vs partitions Message-ID: <cb5206420701170329u6f4b8259p85f423d39033ad8f@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20070117103935.GC4018@genius.tao.org.uk>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On 1/17/07, Josef Karthauser <joe@freebsd.org> wrote: > A poll for opinions if I may? > > I've got a few gmirrors running on various machines, all of which > pair up two drives at the physical level (i.e. mirror /dev/ad0s1 > with /dev/ad1s1). Of course there are other ways of doing it to, > like mirroring at the partition level, ie pairing /dev/ad0s1a with > /dev/ad1s1a, /dev/ad0s1e with /dev/ad0s1e, etc. > > Apart from potentially avoiding a whole disk from being copied > during a resync after a crash, are there any other advantages to > using partition level mirroring instead of drive level mirroring? I can imagine people using partition-level raid to implement a popular configuration: You divide a couple of identical drives proportionally in two partitions each, place a couple of the first partitions into gmirror and a couple of the second ones into gstripe. This way you get both reliable and fast storage with just two drives. Some strings are attached.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?cb5206420701170329u6f4b8259p85f423d39033ad8f>