Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 04:00:14 +0300 From: Sergey Lungu <sergey.lungu@gmail.com> To: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Subject: Re: GEOM stripe + concat Message-ID: <20060125040014.371eae38.sergey.lungu@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20060124234235.GC7617@garage.freebsd.pl> References: <20060122192257.273734cf.sergey.lungu@gmail.com> <20060124222747.GA7617@garage.freebsd.pl> <20060125014310.3f1ce1c9.sergey.lungu@gmail.com> <20060124234235.GC7617@garage.freebsd.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 00:42:35 +0100 Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 01:43:10AM +0300, Sergey Lungu wrote: > +> Perhaps this is dangerous and slow!? > > Give it a try. Certainly I will. > +> What about: > +> da0 - 120GB > +> da1 - 120GB > +> da2 - 300GB > +> da2a - 120GB > +> da2d - 120GB > +> da2e - 60GB > +> > +> concat(stripe(da0, da1, da2a, da2e), da2e) > > -----------------------------------------^ s/e/d/ Sorry, my mistake. > +> >From mathematical point of view this looks simplified :) > > Using two partitions of the same disk in stripe is very bad idea. This was just a joke :) -- Sergey Lungu The more complicated and grandiose the plan, the greater the chance of failure.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060125040014.371eae38.sergey.lungu>