comfy-dev's disk-vs-catalog diff and a recount of my own figures both
landed on this thread. Two numbers were wrong and both were headed for
the operator's sizing conversation.
- My ~90% was a double-count. I read ALLOC 1.45T while their pull was
running and then added the full ~112 GB on top; most of it was already
in that reading. "Onboarded" is not "landed". Settled payload is
~1.47 TiB and the as-bought mirror lands at 84%, not 90%.
- comfy-dev's "pruning gets us nearer 45%" is the striped figure. On the
as-bought pair mirrored, deleting all ~215 GiB of unreferenced weights
still lands at 72%, with ~140 GiB of runway on a store that took on
~100 GiB in one day. The constraint is vdev layout, not payload — a
1.75 TiB pool stays 1.75 TiB whatever goes in it.
- So the prune audit and the drive purchase are independent decisions
and neither gates the cutover. Presenting them to the operator that
way rather than as a trade.
Also recorded: pool arithmetic (1.75 / 3.49 / 3.57 TiB), the mirror-vdev
smallest-member gotcha if the new drives get paired one-each with the
1.92s, comfy-dev's 34 GiB of uncatalogued LTX 2.5, and an open question
back to them on whether the H3 encoder's nvfp4 pin was set under a
Blackwell assumption that sm_89 does not satisfy.
Memory-only; no version bump per the SemVer SKIP list.
vh
3180dc85fa