Drive size

[XDGFX]

I know this is a very minor thing, however for pools that I am basically using as RAID 1, where the data is cloned between the two drives, is it possible to have the drive size and storage usage reflect this?

 

i.e. for a 2x 3TB pool, it currently shows in Windows as "3.16TB free of 5.45TB", however it would make more sense if these values were halved as this is the usable space.

 

Sorry if the wording isn't great

 

Thanks!

[JazzMan]

The trouble is, DP has a lot more flexibility than just RAID 1, you can choose to replicate only certain folders, So DP would have no way of predicting how much usable space those folders might represent in the future.  I think it would be confusing to report drive space one way when drive replication is used and another way when folder replication is used.

[XDGFX]

The trouble is, DP has a lot more flexibility than just RAID 1, you can choose to replicate only certain folders, So DP would have no way of predicting how much usable space those folders might represent in the future.  I think it would be confusing to report drive space one way when drive replication is used and another way when folder replication is used.

 

Of course it shouldn't be the default - I was just wondering if there would be a tweak or something to allow this

[Umfriend]

There is one tweak I know of that roughly works most of the time: Divide numbers by 2 by head.

 

The thing is, so much can happen with the HDDs in a Pool that makes it virtually impossible to do what you want. For instance, you could store data on one of the two HDDs outside of the Pool. You would lose twice as much Pool space. DP *could* perhaps report the space available on the the HDD with least space free but that becomes irrelevant when there are more than two HDDs. In short, the circumstances where it would actually work are very limited.

 

But yeah, I would like it too, if I just thought it was sensibly feasable.

[Christopher (Drashna)]

No, there is no way to do this, no tweak or anything. And there are no plans on doing so.

 

The problem is, that we allow for fine grained control over this.  Even if you set the entire pool to x2 duplication, you can set huge chunks of the pool to be unduplicated, x3 duplication, x10 duplication, etc.

 

And by doing so, it would make setting the free space a lot more difficult.   Do we take the measured data, correlate it with the duplication status for the various files and calculate it off of that? 

If so, that would create wildly varying numbers.  And worse, the resource required to do that every time the disk is queried...  Or even if we stored it locally, it would have to be updated every time data on the pool is altered. 

 

 

While it's feasible to do so, programmatically, the overhead in doing so isn't worth the performance penalty.

 

Especially when, like umfriend mentions, you can do this in your head.