Is there any difference between creating an aggregate on a certain number of disks (say n) , and then later expanding the aggregate to N disks, as opposed to creating the initial aggregate on N disks?
There could be performance issues. In the most extreme case you create an aggregate of n disks, let the aggregate nearly fill, and then add just one more disk. This forces almost all new data to be written to the one new disk causing a performance bottleneck.
You can avoid this problem by adding multiple disks before the aggregate has a chance to completely fill.
By "full" I mean that there is very little free space anywhere in the aggregate, including no free space in volumes or in snapshot reserves.
Steve Losen scl@virginia.edu phone: 434-924-0640
University of Virginia ITC Unix Support