From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 18 13:10:57 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA882106564A for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2008 13:10:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from trashy_bumper@yahoo.com) Received: from web110505.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (web110505.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [67.195.8.253]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A70B38FC1B for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2008 13:10:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from trashy_bumper@yahoo.com) Received: (qmail 88128 invoked by uid 60001); 18 Sep 2008 12:44:17 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID; b=DQiOZj/JSs4HR9xFXGt3azSamJVbkKBLQMyx9bJQjVbpU1LqvFwpt85t+HDWkCGlYt4+WH6aqJCA8ZipYzObOtumtvkrSNI3YIrT7d5FW8mDgeNq1spqk4e1cbmh2ruMK+MxomfoQI7YaHUGvOBpPdl3KnMSI91CilkQLyNB6JY=; X-YMail-OSG: tWmO26sVM1nZ53cY.dtXdwc_5SjnlB0LuN_ITwg5CqKeePv6Fg8XvWQNBLPshDjlF8_Qi0ebu.jtvdROiUpAz8wJPRG.YrwdBOStn1FhUDW7tsNpqWhjwXUm9LH8Mr4dp2qYDg-- Received: from [77.122.205.244] by web110505.mail.gq1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 18 Sep 2008 05:44:17 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.7.218.2 Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 05:44:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Nash Nipples To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-ID: <779784.87096.qm@web110505.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Subject: Vinum for hard disk drive balanced load sharing configuration example RAID-5 X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: trashy_bumper@yahoo.com List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 13:10:58 -0000 Dear Listmates, Is it possible to configure vinum for balancing the mileage between two and three non-volatile storage devices of a different size I have read the manual thoroughly and noticed that the are certain restrictions applied to the hard drive sizes in the proposed RAID5 data handling implementation A fact of use of the plexes as structural entinties make me wonder why would the size of an actual hard drive make a difference to the actual i/o layer when plexes are even and the subdisks sizes are even why not just i/o consequently Can someone please provide me with a working example of a RAID5 configuration Sincerely Nash