2014-12-18 02:24 AM
Solved! SEE THE SOLUTION
2014-12-18 01:20 PM
You want option B.
Option (A) has the cons:
- You lose 2 additional disks to parity using 3 RAID groups
- You lose an additional disk as a hot spare
- When you add an additional shelf you will have 12 spare disks to decide what to do with
- Bottom line you have less space with this option
- No cons I can think of
- Pro -> More space than option (A)
- Pro -> More data disks in the aggregate thus giving you slightly more IOPS
- Easily add another shelf and use 23 disks with 3 hot spares
2014-12-19 12:32 AM
i think i'd be looking option B as well... the only thing i'd look for is when you create new aggregates and a new raid group, make sure you manualy select the disks to go in the RG, otherwise you will potentially end up with the disk in the preveious shelf been in the new RAID group, alhtough technically this isn't a problem, if you are thinking about logical boundaries to manage your raw disks, then it's a consideration.