Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Finished a project and got to run a test tonight.
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="tRidiot" data-source="post: 2852106" data-attributes="member: 9374"><p>I agree, I understood it and think it's cool as heck. Also in for the explanation as to the RAID structure.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Some things I found on Wikipedia:</p><p></p><p>"ZFS stores the checksum of each block in its parent block pointer so the entire pool self-validates."</p><p></p><p>"RAID-Z does not require any special hardware: it does not need NVRAM for reliability, and it does not need write buffering for good performance. With RAID-Z, ZFS provides fast, reliable storage using cheap, commodity disks."</p><p></p><p>"There are three different RAID-Z modes: RAID-Z1 (similar to RAID 5, allows one disk to fail), RAID-Z2 (similar to RAID 6, allows two disks to fail), and RAID-Z3 (allows three disks to fail). The need for RAID-Z3 arose recently because RAID configurations with future disks (say, 6&#8211;10 TB) may take a long time to repair, the worst case being weeks. During those weeks, the rest of the disks in the RAID are stressed more because of the additional intensive repair process and might subsequently fail, too. By using RAID-Z3, the risk involved with disk replacement is reduced."</p><p></p><p></p><p>So these things have something to do with it? Are you really concerned with having that many drive failures? What kind data are you storing that it takes that kind of redundancy and self-healing file restoration and on-the-fly continuous rechecking? It sounds like you've got movies on there, is this mainly for a home NAS setup?</p><p></p><p>I've got a 12TB 4-disk NAS in RAID5 which has about half of its 8 or so terabytes of accessible storage full right now, but nothing is critical data - it's used strictly as a home media server for Kodi. I'm wondering if this kind of setup (I'd never researched ZFS before) would be of any benefit to me. I believe I'd need to overwrite/flash my storage device's hardware RAID in order to use another device to perform the actual read/write, yes? I mean, I couldn't use my Netgear NAS, I suppose I'd have to build a separate box like you did? What did you build for your box? It's not RAM-intensive per Wikipedia, as there's no write-caching?</p><p></p><p>I may not be understanding everything completely, I'm pretty shallow in this gene pool...</p><p></p><p>Cool writeup, though, thanks!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="tRidiot, post: 2852106, member: 9374"] I agree, I understood it and think it's cool as heck. Also in for the explanation as to the RAID structure. Some things I found on Wikipedia: "ZFS stores the checksum of each block in its parent block pointer so the entire pool self-validates." "RAID-Z does not require any special hardware: it does not need NVRAM for reliability, and it does not need write buffering for good performance. With RAID-Z, ZFS provides fast, reliable storage using cheap, commodity disks." "There are three different RAID-Z modes: RAID-Z1 (similar to RAID 5, allows one disk to fail), RAID-Z2 (similar to RAID 6, allows two disks to fail), and RAID-Z3 (allows three disks to fail). The need for RAID-Z3 arose recently because RAID configurations with future disks (say, 6–10 TB) may take a long time to repair, the worst case being weeks. During those weeks, the rest of the disks in the RAID are stressed more because of the additional intensive repair process and might subsequently fail, too. By using RAID-Z3, the risk involved with disk replacement is reduced." So these things have something to do with it? Are you really concerned with having that many drive failures? What kind data are you storing that it takes that kind of redundancy and self-healing file restoration and on-the-fly continuous rechecking? It sounds like you've got movies on there, is this mainly for a home NAS setup? I've got a 12TB 4-disk NAS in RAID5 which has about half of its 8 or so terabytes of accessible storage full right now, but nothing is critical data - it's used strictly as a home media server for Kodi. I'm wondering if this kind of setup (I'd never researched ZFS before) would be of any benefit to me. I believe I'd need to overwrite/flash my storage device's hardware RAID in order to use another device to perform the actual read/write, yes? I mean, I couldn't use my Netgear NAS, I suppose I'd have to build a separate box like you did? What did you build for your box? It's not RAM-intensive per Wikipedia, as there's no write-caching? I may not be understanding everything completely, I'm pretty shallow in this gene pool... Cool writeup, though, thanks! [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Finished a project and got to run a test tonight.
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom