On the one hand, I like the idea of upgrading to 6TB or 10TB drives in the future. I like having one or two big mirrors and I like the flexibility of only having one mirror per pool. I need to combine two 3TB mirrors in one pool to store all my media in one location. I can also get away with using fewer drives if I move away from 3TB disks: all my files will fit comfortably on pool consisting of a single 10TB mirror, and the server will use less power overall with fewer drives. The downside is that 6TB - 10TB drives are more expensive to replace, even if they're cheaper per GB.
On the other hand, I like the relative cost effectiveness of 3TB drives. They're cheap and available, and I feel comfortable using factory refurbished/recertified drives, which saves even more money. The downside is for large collections like my media, I have to use a two-mirror pool to store it all in one pool. This isn't a problem necessarily, except that I'm stuck with a four disk pool. I have to upgrade my other pool to be large enough to store everything before I can destroy the four-disk pool and reconfigure it or retire disks.
So, if you had a configuration like mine, what would you do the next time a disk fails? Would you continue using 3TB drives? Or would you replace the failed disk with something larger?
Thanks for any thoughts or opinions!
Code: Select all
pool: pool01 state: ONLINE scan: scrub in progress since Thu Jul 11 06:56:09 2019 1.76T scanned out of 3.66T at 139M/s, 3h58m to go 0 repaired, 48.09% done config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM pool01 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror-0 ONLINE 0 0 0 ada0 ONLINE 0 0 0 ada1 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror-1 ONLINE 0 0 0 ada2 ONLINE 0 0 0 ada3 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors pool: pool02 state: ONLINE scan: scrub repaired 0 in 7h21m with 0 errors on Mon Jul 1 07:21:12 2019 config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM pool02 ONLINE 0 0 0 mirror-0 ONLINE 0 0 0 ada4 ONLINE 0 0 0 ada5 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors