I have an NAS server with 4x 2TB WD RE4-GP drives in a RAID10 configuration (4TB usable). I'm running out of space (<1TB usable space left). I have $0 to spend on bigger/more drives/enclosures.
I like what I've read about the data-integrity features of ZFS, which - on their own - are enough for me to switch from my existing XFS (software) RAID10. Then I read about ZFS's superior implementation of RAID5, so I thought I might even get up to 2TB more usable space in the bargain using RAIDZ-1.
However, I keep reading more and more posts saying pretty much to just never use RAIDZ-1. Only RAIDZ-2+ is reliable enough to handle "real world" drive failures. Of course, in my case, RAIDZ-2 doesn't make any sense. It'd be much better to use two mirrored vdevs in a single pool (RAID10).
Am I crazy wanting to use RAIDZ-1 for 4x 2TB drives?
Should I just use a pool of two mirrored vdevs (essentially RAID10) and hope the compression gives me enough extra space?
Either way, I plan on using compression. I only have 8GB of RAM (maxed), so dedup isn't an option.
This will be on a FreeNAS server (about to replace the current Ubuntu OS) to avoid the stability issues of ZFS-on-Linux.