blacksteel75
Dabbler
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2019
- Messages
- 28
Hi all,
Looking for recommendations on whether to change my existing 4 disk raidz1 into two mirrors, or leave as is. I'm interested in pros/cons of changing the pool configuration, or if this is even worth the effort? Here's my setup:
TrueNAS SCALE (latest)
- HPE Microserver Gen10, 64GB RAM
- (1) 500Gb NVM (pool used for ix-applications and VMs only)
- (1) raidz1 pool made of (2) 2TB, and (2) 4TB Seagate IronWolf drives.
-- The reason for the two larger 4TB drives is because I had to replace two of the original 2TB drives a year ago. So I am not using the full storage of those 4TB disks because raidz1 will only use the size of the smaller disks. Works fine, but can't access all the space.
-- Currently using only about ~3.2TB of the raidz1 pool
- All datasets are replicated/backed up daily to an offsite server
- I don't anticipate needing more storage in the future. Much of my pool space is actually used for TimeMachine backups and I'm not adding more media.
Option 1: Keep raidz1 and expand drive sizes.
- Upgrade the (2) 2TB drives to (2) new 4TB drives, and expand the pool.
- Way more storage than I anticipate needing anytime soon, but nice to have all drives of the same size and similar ages in the same pool.
- Cost is about $160 for the (2) new 4TB disks.
Option 2: Go to mirrors with existing disks.
- Convert the (2) 4TB drives to a mirror, and the (2) 2TB drives into another mirror
- This would increase my storage space a bit, I believe beyond what I have currently in the 2TB raidz1 setup.
- No cost, but I would need to figure out how to migrate the setup.
Option 3: Do nothing for now (until something fails)
- Always an option, but I'd rather make the change now.
I've seen a few posts mentioning that it isn't good to have drives larger than 2TB in a raidz1 pool, and others saying that it doesn't really matter, so I'm looking for a "poll" from the experts on the options above.
And, if "Option 2", what's the recommended way to make this change? I'm unclear of the steps to take.
I'm not particularly interested in performance, since the pool is mostly used for backups and longer-term storage. Very few users (home lab), so not optimizing for throughput or scale.
Thank you in advance!
Looking for recommendations on whether to change my existing 4 disk raidz1 into two mirrors, or leave as is. I'm interested in pros/cons of changing the pool configuration, or if this is even worth the effort? Here's my setup:
TrueNAS SCALE (latest)
- HPE Microserver Gen10, 64GB RAM
- (1) 500Gb NVM (pool used for ix-applications and VMs only)
- (1) raidz1 pool made of (2) 2TB, and (2) 4TB Seagate IronWolf drives.
-- The reason for the two larger 4TB drives is because I had to replace two of the original 2TB drives a year ago. So I am not using the full storage of those 4TB disks because raidz1 will only use the size of the smaller disks. Works fine, but can't access all the space.
-- Currently using only about ~3.2TB of the raidz1 pool
- All datasets are replicated/backed up daily to an offsite server
- I don't anticipate needing more storage in the future. Much of my pool space is actually used for TimeMachine backups and I'm not adding more media.
Option 1: Keep raidz1 and expand drive sizes.
- Upgrade the (2) 2TB drives to (2) new 4TB drives, and expand the pool.
- Way more storage than I anticipate needing anytime soon, but nice to have all drives of the same size and similar ages in the same pool.
- Cost is about $160 for the (2) new 4TB disks.
Option 2: Go to mirrors with existing disks.
- Convert the (2) 4TB drives to a mirror, and the (2) 2TB drives into another mirror
- This would increase my storage space a bit, I believe beyond what I have currently in the 2TB raidz1 setup.
- No cost, but I would need to figure out how to migrate the setup.
Option 3: Do nothing for now (until something fails)
- Always an option, but I'd rather make the change now.
I've seen a few posts mentioning that it isn't good to have drives larger than 2TB in a raidz1 pool, and others saying that it doesn't really matter, so I'm looking for a "poll" from the experts on the options above.
And, if "Option 2", what's the recommended way to make this change? I'm unclear of the steps to take.
I'm not particularly interested in performance, since the pool is mostly used for backups and longer-term storage. Very few users (home lab), so not optimizing for throughput or scale.
Thank you in advance!