capacity impropery reported

[rs232]

Please see the system information in the image:

It says:
61% of 7.25TB
Total: 7.25T | Used: 3.36T | Free: 1.98T

Being this a raidz-1 the capacity should be reported as "N-1" and not "N". So 3.36T used + 1.98T free = 5.34T Total and not 7.25T as displayed.

Regards
rs232

[misterredman]

The space reported for the Total is the result of the "zpool list"command, which lists the total space (available to your pool and that include the parity disks). See here:

http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Com ... andmatch3F

So it is in principle correct.

But I don't know why they choose to use this instead of the result of the "zfs list" command, which would list the space available to the user (and which seems to be used for the "Used" and "Free" space reporting).

[rs232]

Any chance to correct this please? I appreciate that total is coming from the system, but if that's the case a safe way to report the total capacity on the GUI would be to so a simple = free + used.

my 2 cents

[rostreich]

Any chance to correct this please? I appreciate that total is coming from the system, but if that's the case a safe way to report the total capacity on the GUI would be to so a simple = free + used.

my 2 cents

I was confused with this, too. But the funny thing is, it´s only with Raidz1. In mirror it's correct.

[Floh]

I think I have the same problem. I have defined two vdevs: 4x1.5TB and 4x2TB as RAIDZ2. I put them in one pool since I only wanted a single drive.
Now the system says I have 12.7T capacity, but the sums don´t match up (2.45T used, 3.77T free which makes 6.22T in total)
So only about 50% of the shown 12.7 TB are available?
The drive works fine, I can access it from Windows and Linux, but before I fill it up I need to know if I have to back everything up and change the whole setup again or if everything is fine...

So
Did I do something wrong while setting up the pool or is this the error you mentioned above?

[Floh]

Forget I asked, should have done some more reading before I posted the question.
I will think about reducing from RAIDZ2 to RAIDZ1 though if if means sacrificing this much space. Even though 6.22 TiBytes might equal the 7 Terabytes I had before as a RAID-10 ??

[rostreich]

4x1,5 TB in RAIDZ2 = 3 TB usable
4x2 TB in RAIDZ2 = 4 TB usable

So yeah, it is correct with 7 TB.