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))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CA1464C8B
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 09:54:45 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 7407315331
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 09:54:45 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [212.186.127.180])
 (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 id 1678815324
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 09:54:45 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D8CCB432CA;
 Tue, 21 Jul 2020 09:54:44 +0200 (CEST)
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Andreas Steinel <a.steinel@gmail.com>
References: <20200717121232.29020-1-a.lauterer@proxmox.com>
 <CACNWVs3D00T6NHnQufJK+Zomogf0QmGnT_+384hrASfKQCK+jw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Aaron Lauterer <a.lauterer@proxmox.com>
Message-ID: <38856cb1-0d2b-3f40-8229-0028e447740c@proxmox.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 09:54:44 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CACNWVs3D00T6NHnQufJK+Zomogf0QmGnT_+384hrASfKQCK+jw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL 0.000 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 NICE_REPLY_A           -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A)
 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED        -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
 medium trust
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH docs DRAFT] Add section with more infos
 about ZFS RAID levels
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: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 07:54:45 -0000



On 7/17/20 3:23 PM, Andreas Steinel wrote:
> Very good.
> 
> Maybe we can also include some references to books, e.g. the ZFS books from
> Allan Jude and Michael W. Lucas for further reading?
> 
That is a good idea IMHO. But I think this section is not the right place. I would put it somewhere in the introduction at the beginning of the ZFS chapter.