Capacity discrepancy after expanding RAIDZ1

[etorix]

Space reporting after expansion is wrong.

24.10 RC2 Raidz expansion caused miscalculated available storage

Well. The actual host pool only has 4T available[1]… heh, so it would be bad Meanwhile, as I mentioned before, this is the relevant quote from the relevant bug /* * Compute the raidz-deflation ratio. Note, we hard-code 128k (1 << 17) * because it is the "typical" blocksize. Even though SPA_MAXBLOCKSIZE * changed, this algorithm can not change, otherwise it would inconsistently * account for existing bp's. We also hard-code txg 0 for the same reason * since expanded RAIDZ vdevs c…