On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 12:00 PM, sys.syphus <syssyp...@gmail.com> wrote: > oh, and sorry to bump myself. but is raid10 *ever* more redundant in > btrfs-speak than raid1? I currently use raid1 but i know in mdadm > speak raid10 means you can lose 2 drives assuming they aren't the > "wrong ones", is it safe to say with btrfs / raid 10 you can only lose > one no matter what?
It's only for sure one in any case even with conventional raid10. It just depends on which 2 you lose that depends whether your data has dodged a bullet. Obviously you can't lose a drive and its mirror, ever, or the array collapses. -- Chris Murphy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
