From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <pve-user-bounces@lists.proxmox.com> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A83B91FF164 for <inbox@lore.proxmox.com>; Fri, 23 May 2025 20:17:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id BEC8A28054; Fri, 23 May 2025 20:17:44 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=psg.com; s=rgnet-mail; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc: To:From:Message-ID:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=IpA6eTLT8lvkaDy/Edx67M0Apj69MvNlqoPseORWOOc=; b=BcW8/apbyC4BFMBEfT/fdfutQj rD44uPDnPsCESpN4/ESX8HytcvoGWaPUvD9fNshee3tEMkdVfRp4xi+Tra1uBuj9WJL8W8YqgxgWQ RXS3/d0/TwwIwa+omivADxWIzyhFqCsqGWvilx01lVdCL8seHR9TZXJLLgn04unfSzKG6oxgTtnw6 nj/nlOWQaT3QvTbsTqV4dCL4X/83kZLG1ZTCAuTPCxlsJZHkoNpcqbilNnuaZzT4FPR/5isRkVCtk hqv/bRG8PZn6q2kc+24Z8iT8ngb6TBTJU+AfsvY04uZ0tz0TzIFYk4Vj1/yAo5PRMzzkccU/gvetS yd7dSVMw==; Date: Fri, 23 May 2025 11:17:38 -0700 Message-ID: <m21psfjinx.wl-randy@psg.com> From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> To: Aaron Lauterer <a.lauterer@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <e8c83c5c-0923-4ced-8c5d-bd371afdf926@proxmox.com> References: <m24ixgm5uj.wl-randy@psg.com> <8fa284b2-11b6-4136-82df-cc81a1976213@proxmox.com> <m2o6vnkxjq.wl-randy@psg.com> <9aed076a-0e2e-46b9-9ee3-2e6d9abdf651@proxmox.com> <m2ecwgjr34.wl-randy@psg.com> <e8c83c5c-0923-4ced-8c5d-bd371afdf926@proxmox.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/27.2 Mule/6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.575 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_PASS -0.001 SPF: HELO matches SPF record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [psg.com] Subject: Re: [PVE-User] zfs raidz2 expansion X-BeenThere: pve-user@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE user list <pve-user.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-user>, <mailto:pve-user-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-user/> List-Post: <mailto:pve-user@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pve-user-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user>, <mailto:pve-user-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> Reply-To: Proxmox VE user list <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com> Cc: Proxmox VE user list <pve-user@lists.proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-user-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-user" <pve-user-bounces@lists.proxmox.com> > There is no option to replicate a full ZFS pool to another. not exactly what i want to do. my bad in saying "full replication." what i meant was all vms are replicated. on other nodes. i was thinking that each node could have one pool for primary vm images and a second to receive replication from other nodes. > So, you have a current pool with one raidz2 VDEV made up of 4x 2TB > disks. yup > Because if you have another set of 4x 2TB disks, you can just expand > the pool with another raidz2 VDEV, without expanding the current VDEV > you have. yup. what are the performance implications? > If you add another VDEV, the pool could have the following layout: > > pool > raidz2-0 > disk0 > disk1 > disk2 > disk3 > raidz2-1 > disk4 > disk5 > disk6 > disk7 yup > If you want to create a new pool, then things will be a bit more > complicated, as you would need to create a new storage config for it > as well, Move-Disk all the disks over to it. If you have a cluster and > use the VM replication feature, that new pool must be present on the > other nodes as well and you will have to remove the replication jobs > before you move the disks to the new pool and then re-create them once > all VM disks are on the new pool. we would keep the nodes all symmetric, so that would not be an issue. and it's just a few hours of ops pain to de-repl and re-repl. but what i do not see is how to tell `/etc/pve/storage.cfg` that pool0 is for images and pool1 is for incoming replication. maybe i am just trying to do something too weird. randy _______________________________________________ pve-user mailing list pve-user@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user