I have a machine with a zfs bootable root comprised of a two-disk mirror plus a spare. I added three more disks as a three-disk mirror in a separate zpool. One of those disks was then also detached and re-added as a spare for that mirror only. No disks in the second zpool have an OS or bootcode. zpool status just shows them as buckets with a single GEOM partition; ada0, ada1, ada2.
This is all just experimentation but, compared to what I have now (rpool mirror+spare and dpool mirror + spare), would there have been any benefits to have instead created the second pool as a second mirror on the boot pool (rpool mirror-0 and mirror-1)? I'd like to think dpool is physically transportable in the event that rpool is wiped out but really, what is the possibility or need of that. I'm also finding ZFS to be almost too flexible.
This is all just experimentation but, compared to what I have now (rpool mirror+spare and dpool mirror + spare), would there have been any benefits to have instead created the second pool as a second mirror on the boot pool (rpool mirror-0 and mirror-1)? I'd like to think dpool is physically transportable in the event that rpool is wiped out but really, what is the possibility or need of that. I'm also finding ZFS to be almost too flexible.