RAIDZ2 volume smaller size than expected. Did I do something wrong?

[darkod]

Hello all.
Complete novice with FreeNAS here. I downloaded the latest 8.2.0 version yesterday and I'm trying it out in Virtual Box. Apart from the OS disk, I created in Vbox 6 disks of 4GiB each. Maybe this is part of the problem, did I make the disks too small for a real test?

In FreeNAS in Volume Manager I selected all disks, the ZFS option and then the offered RAIDZ2 option. All good so far.

But the volume was created with only 7.8GiB available, barely the size of two disks, not 4 as I expected (you lose 2 out of the 6 for parity). Also, the space is so much smaller that this isn't a question of GB vs GiB.

What did I do wrong?

The volume manager correctly reports the disks as 4.3GB (which is the same as 4GiB) during the creation of the volume. But the resulting volume is too small. Is this a result of some overhead which cuts a big piece of these small 4GiB disks, so that the space used is much smaller later?

Thanks in advance.
Darko.

 

[William Grzybowski]

Oh, not this question, again! A search over the forum would have save the trouble.

FreeNAS created 2gb swap at the beginning of every disk.

 

[darkod]

Sorry. I did try a google search which usually picks up forums very good.

Thank you.

 

[cyberjock]

Oh, not this question, again! A search over the forum would have save the trouble.

FreeNAS created 2gb swap at the beginning of every disk.

Haha. I KNEW this was coming. I know this answer keeps coming up and I had forgotten the answer(I was sleepy). I was sure someone was going to comment that this question had "come up again".

 

[Saeed A Siddiki]

not sound like a douche guys but i need help here - its almost the same question:

my situation:
The hard drives are the regular run of the mill in these capacities - green drives and one WD Blue Drive:

4 X 1TB * = *4
3X 2TB*= *6
2X 3TB *= *6
1X * 750GB = *750 GB *

TOTAL TO = 16TB physical*
-3tb overhead (in theory)

i should end up at least with at least 12 TB OR 10TB ---

BUT WHATS SHOWING under

RAIDZ IS 5.6TB*and

under RAIDZ2 5.3TB
(i still don't have REAL DATA stored on this volume yet)

The Calculator link is suggesting: (which is all jibrish FOR ME at this point)

 

[darkod]

With so many disks of different size, you have to really sit down and think how to organize them. If you just stick all of them in one RAIDZ (RAIDZ2) storage volume, all of them will be limited to using only the smallest size.
Can you give more details which disks exactly are in your RAIDZ and RAIDZ2 arrays?

 

[cyberjock]

Saeed A Siddiki has 7 posts today, and 6 from yesterday, all asking the same question. Please, forum moderators, do something. This is just out of control. I thought I made it clear yesterday when I posted to all of his threads to stop, but he's back today.

He needs to be banned, prevented from posting, or something, until he understands that posting to multiple threads won't give you more answers. Not to mention that his question doesn't have much to do with the threads he's posting in.

 

[Milhouse]

not sound like a douche guys but i need help here - its almost the same question:

Irrespective of whether or not you sound like a douche, you're certainly acting like one by posting the same question in multiple threads (some of them very old, and not even relevant). Stop this behaviour immediately or you'll be banned, initially temporarily and then eventually permanently. I've already deleted several of your duplicate posts as they are completely unnecessary. From this point onwards please restrict your posts to a single, relevant thread.

 

[donairb]

Not to mention that his question was answered (twice, at least -- once by me) long before he did his second round of postings.

Brian