From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <a.lauterer@proxmox.com> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 333B9BF462 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 5 Jan 2024 10:16:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1B2EA19948 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 5 Jan 2024 10:16:48 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 5 Jan 2024 10:16:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id BF4ED44701 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 5 Jan 2024 10:16:46 +0100 (CET) From: Aaron Lauterer <a.lauterer@proxmox.com> To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2024 10:16:46 +0100 Message-Id: <20240105091646.14903-1-a.lauterer@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.39.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.069 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 - Subject: [pve-devel] [PATCH docs] local-zfs: use correct man page for vdev infos X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/> List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2024 09:16:48 -0000 ZFS did split up their man pages a while ago Signed-off-by: Aaron Lauterer <a.lauterer@proxmox.com> --- local-zfs.adoc | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/local-zfs.adoc b/local-zfs.adoc index 63de884..58726a7 100644 --- a/local-zfs.adoc +++ b/local-zfs.adoc @@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ ZFS RAID Level Considerations There are a few factors to take into consideration when choosing the layout of a ZFS pool. The basic building block of a ZFS pool is the virtual device, or `vdev`. All vdevs in a pool are used equally and the data is striped among them -(RAID0). Check the `zpool(8)` manpage for more details on vdevs. +(RAID0). Check the `zpoolconcepts(7)` manpage for more details on vdevs. [[sysadmin_zfs_raid_performance]] Performance -- 2.39.2