anaxagorasbc
Dabbler
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2021
- Messages
- 15
I'm upgrading my nas and converting to truenas/zfs. I would like to do an 8 drive raidz2 of 18tb disks. To me 8 drives feels like the sweet spot for redundancy vs space efficiency due to parity for the type of data i'm storing. At 10 drives i'm not sure i'm comfortable with a raidz2 with the resilver time on 18tb drives.
I found some rather dated posts that sugested "2^n + parity" as the number of drives to have in an array
thus for a raidz2, the "optimal" number of drives would be: 4, 6, 10
and raidz2 that would be: 5, 7, 11
Does this still hold true for any reason? Or is it outdated as things have changed?
I've read some stuff that using compression negates this, but since my storage will all be "media", video, pictures, audio - data that generally doesn't compress that well i don't plan on using compression on my main dataset.
So i'm currently debating a single vdev of 8x18tb, or starting with a single 6x18tb vdev and then as i need more storage in the future adding a second 6x18tb vdev to the pool.
I found some rather dated posts that sugested "2^n + parity" as the number of drives to have in an array
thus for a raidz2, the "optimal" number of drives would be: 4, 6, 10
and raidz2 that would be: 5, 7, 11
Does this still hold true for any reason? Or is it outdated as things have changed?
I've read some stuff that using compression negates this, but since my storage will all be "media", video, pictures, audio - data that generally doesn't compress that well i don't plan on using compression on my main dataset.
So i'm currently debating a single vdev of 8x18tb, or starting with a single 6x18tb vdev and then as i need more storage in the future adding a second 6x18tb vdev to the pool.