Help with TrueNas core

[Josh1200]

There is no such thing as "RAID-Z". Likewise, RAID-Z1 does not exist either.

Please read the resource from @jgreco below. You probably think that I am overdoing it with precision on abbreviations. But in IT precision is a matter of "life or death" (metaphorically speaking, mostly but not exclusively). The number of IT projects that failed because of someone using wrong terminology is obscenely high.

Just one example I was told: A company only had reporting on its sales number with 20 days delay. So the business folks went to the IT guys and said that they wanted real-time reporting. That was about 20 years ago, so a lot of ground work was necessary. After about a year and many millions of dollars spent there was a meeting to check if everything was on track. At this time it became clear that the true requirement of the business was not real-time, but less than 24 hours of delay.

Terminology and Abbreviations Primer

We realize that new users have a lot to learn when they come to FreeNAS. There's a certain amount of confusion added to discussions when users pick random/approximate terms to describe things. I've spent a lot of time quietly trying to translate terms on the reader's side when reading posts...

www.truenas.com

You are confusing me a lot i have no clue at all now. You just said that everything the other people told me is not true so now i have no idea anymore thanks

 

[Patrick M. Hausen]

Mr. @winnielinnie? We have a preliminary shooting order ...

 

[Josh1200]

There is no such thing as "RAID-Z". Likewise, RAID-Z1 does not exist either.

Please read the resource from @jgreco below. You probably think that I am overdoing it with precision on abbreviations. But in IT precision is a matter of "life or death" (metaphorically speaking, mostly but not exclusively). The number of IT projects that failed because of someone using wrong terminology is obscenely high.

Just one example I was told: A company only had reporting on its sales number with 20 days delay. So the business folks went to the IT guys and said that they wanted real-time reporting. That was about 20 years ago, so a lot of ground work was necessary. After about a year and many millions of dollars spent there was a meeting to check if everything was on track. At this time it became clear that the true requirement of the business was not real-time, but less than 24 hours of delay.

Terminology and Abbreviations Primer

We realize that new users have a lot to learn when they come to FreeNAS. There's a certain amount of confusion added to discussions when users pick random/approximate terms to describe things. I've spent a lot of time quietly trying to translate terms on the reader's side when reading posts...

www.truenas.com

I dont understand this "There is no such thing as "RAID-Z". Likewise, RAID-Z1 does not exist either."

can you pls explain that?

 

[ChrisRJ]

You are confusing me a lot i have no clue at all now. You just said that everything the other people told me is not true so now i have no idea anymore thanks

What I tried to convey is that the correct terminology for a setup like yours (4 disks, 1 disk redundancy) is "RAIDZ1", not "RAID-Z", and not "RAID-Z1". The latter is a bit petty, admittedly. But "RAID-Z" or "RAIDZ" has been used in the past by folks who forgot to add the correct number. In other words, they were thinking about RAIDZ2, but everyone else understood things as RAIDZ1.

It gets much worse with networking speeds, as @winnielinnie demoed in his "ironic" post.

 

[sretalla]

What I tried to convey is that the correct terminology for a setup like yours (4 disks, 1 disk redundancy) is "RAIDZ1", not "RAID-Z"

I would like to point out that I used that term in reference to the item in the screenshot at the beginning of the thread.

It's certainly confusing to tell someone that something they can see in the product doesn't exist.

 

[Josh1200]

What I tried to convey is that the correct terminology for a setup like yours (4 disks, 1 disk redundancy) is "RAIDZ1", not "RAID-Z", and not "RAID-Z1". The latter is a bit petty, admittedly. But "RAID-Z" or "RAIDZ" has been used in the past by folks who forgot to add the correct number. In other words, they were thinking about RAIDZ2, but everyone else understood things as RAIDZ1.

It gets much worse with networking speeds, as @winnielinnie demoed in his "ironic" post.

My setup has 3 Disk. And look at my truenas system there is no option for RAID-Z1 thats why i said RAID_Z But if understand you i shouldn't use that term. So i have a setup with RAID-Z1. right?

 

[ChrisRJ]

I would like to point out that I used that term in reference to the item in the screenshot at the beginning of the thread.

It's certainly confusing to tell someone that something they can see in the product doesn't exist.

That is indeed a problem and I apologize for having missed that aspect. Thanks, @sretalla , for pointing this out!

It is unfortunate that the names in the UI deviate from what I thought until now is the correct terminology.

@Josh1200 , sorry for having confused you.

 

[winnielinnie]

It is unfortunate that the names in the UI deviate from what I thought until now is the correct terminology.

In my opinion, the GUI is ambiguous. It needs to be less vague, and treat the user with at least some assumption that they will appreciate more nuanced information. It's not like the tooltips need to be 8,000-word essays, but it shouldn't be so simplified with terminology like "Raid-z".

EDIT: For example, the text should read something like this:

• Mirror (can survive the loss of all but one drive)
• RAIDZ1 (can survive the loss of one drive)
• RAIDZ2 (can survive the loss of two drives)
• RAIDZ3 (can survive the loss of three drives)

As for useable storage capacity? There's already text beneath the vdev section that calculates this. (So the user can already note that a mirror vdev will offer lower useable storage capacity.)

Yes, it should use the term "RAIDZ1", since "RAIDZ" is used loosely when discussing redundancy for ZFS pools. (E.g, "You should consider some type of RAIDZ vdev if you want to leverage the auto-repair and redundancy capabilities that ZFS offers, while still yielding a good amount of data capacity.")

 

[jgreco]

9000mpbs

.... 9000 mega peanut butters per second? ... yum

 

[winnielinnie]

I could pretend that I wrote that typo "on purpose" to prove a point, since I'm just so "self-aware" and witty.

 

[Josh1200]

What I tried to convey is that the correct terminology for a setup like yours (4 disks, 1 disk redundancy) is "RAIDZ1", not "RAID-Z", and not "RAID-Z1". The latter is a bit petty, admittedly. But "RAID-Z" or "RAIDZ" has been used in the past by folks who forgot to add the correct number. In other words, they were thinking about RAIDZ2, but everyone else understood things as RAIDZ1.

It gets much worse with networking speeds, as @winnielinnie demoed in his "ironic" post.

AHh okay thanks for explaining

 

[Josh1200]

I would like to point out that I used that term in reference to the item in the screenshot at the beginning of the thread.

It's certainly confusing to tell someone that something they can see in the product doesn't exist.

yeah it is confusing but no problem i am glad you explained it to me and you tried helping me

 

[Josh1200]

That is indeed a problem and I apologize for having missed that aspect. Thanks, @sretalla , for pointing this out!

It is unfortunate that the names in the UI deviate from what I thought until now is the correct terminology.

@Josh1200 , sorry for having confused you.

No problem. I am glad you helped too, thanks a lot.

Again apologies accepted men no problem thx