Storage spaces with vhdx inside

[frankr2994]

I just had a question of whether this is a good practice or not. It seems to work fine but I've only short term tested. I will have 4 physical disk that I will make a mirrored storage space pool formatted refs. Pool will be 8tb physical and I'm going to set it to 32tb for future expansion. I then want to make 2 vhdx drives within this. Each vhdx will be set to 16tb. I can obviously keep an eye of the physical storage being used and add 2 drives at a time when needed. What I have a concern about is the vhdx inside the refs pool. Vhdx is formatted ntfs. Do I get the benefits of refs while using this setup or is this just a totally wrong setup? 

[HarryTri]

Why do you want to use vhdx drives and you don't just use the storage space pool itself (divided to two mirror storage space pools if you want - although storage space pools don't work in this way, they have redundancy themselves and there is no need for mirrors, I don't know if I understand what you want to do correctly).

[frankr2994]

I was just looking for a clean way to set this up. I want the redundancy and I want to have 2 separate drives. What I liked about my idea is that I can use all of my drive space no matter how much or how little I have on a vhdx I mean like if I divided everything up so I had 2 4tb drives I could put 4tb on each obviously. The other way I could have 7 on one and 1 on the other. Now that's not realistic but 5 and 3 probably is. I thought about just using 1 pool and creating 2 files in it which would work I just thought it would be a little nicer to point to a specific drive. I'm probably over thinking this but regardless of what I do I'd like an answer. I found this asked one other time on a different forum and the answer was unclear.  I thought it would have been common to have a large refs pool that people would set a bunch of vhdx's up for virtual machines but I'm either wrong or nobody post about it lol.