2

I've move a zfs filesystem from a pool made of a bunch or mirror vdevs to another pool made of two raidz1s with the following command

# zfs send -R pool/project@moving | zfs recv tank/project

As far as I understood the manpage, '-R' moves all the metadata as well, including the compression algorithm etc., which is exactly what I see:

# zfs get compression pool/project
NAME            PROPERTY     VALUE     SOURCE
pool/project    compression  lz4       local
# zfs get compression tank/project
NAME            PROPERTY     VALUE     SOURCE
tank/project    compression  lz4       received

So why is the the filesystem on the target pool (tank) over 20% bigger than on the source pool (pool). It's a diference of almost 6TB and I'm curious, where I lost that.

ewwhite
  • 197,159
  • 92
  • 443
  • 809
Clayton Louden
  • 333
  • 1
  • 4
  • 16
  • Show the filesystem sizes, please... `zfs list` – ewwhite Jul 21 '14 at 11:30
  • Oh, you're right, 'zfs list' show actually the same size. But why does 'zpool list' show this: # zpool list NAME SIZE ALLOC FREE EXPANDSZ CAP DEDUP HEALTH ALTROOT pool 36.2T 27.9T 8.33T - 77% 1.00x ONLINE - tank 36.2T 34.7T 1.57T - 95% 1.00x ONLINE - – Clayton Louden Jul 21 '14 at 11:57
  • Curious. Why are you moving to RAIDZ? – ewwhite Jul 21 '14 at 12:44

1 Answers1

2

ZFS mirrors are usually much better than RAIDZ(1/2/3) for a variety of reasons (performance, expansion, sanity). This confusion about displayed size is one of them.

Please see: Why is my RAIDZ2 pool larger than the expected size calculation?

Community
  • 1
ewwhite
  • 197,159
  • 92
  • 443
  • 809