On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 7:38 PM, Roland Smith <rsm...@xs4all.nl> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 05:08:33PM +0100, Svein Skogen (Listmail account) > wrote: >> But it's still not capable of true forward-error-correction. If we are >> to embark upon creating a new solution, using something that is cheap >> for "normal cases" but can still be used (albeit more expensively) for >> error recovery would (imho) be better. Even if that means we get less >> net storage out of the gross pool (it could perhaps be configurable?) > > I'm not sure what you mean by "true forward-error-correction". But if you want > to make _really sure_ that a spinning disk hasn't mangled the data you should:
Maybe something like Reed-Solomon ECC in different blocks. Should a data block go bad, it could be rebuilt on-the-fly from those ECC blocks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reed%E2%80%93Solomon_error_correction http://www.eccpage.com/ -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
