On 03/05/10 15:49, Bart Noordervliet wrote:
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 21:31, Josef Bacik<jo...@redhat.com> wrote:
Since I have three devices in a RAID1 pool, can it survive 2 drive failures?
Yes, tho you won't be able to remove more than 1 at a time (since it wants you
to keep at least two disks around). Thanks,
Josef
Hmm, I would expect the raid1 data mode to keep 2 copies of each file
and thus yield 50% effective storage capacity, even with 3 disks. I
see no real reason to stick with the full-disk mirroring mentality of
previous raid systems since raid implemented in a filesystem works
differently. Or would it be difficult to implement btrfs raid1 like
this?
Maybe it's worth to consider leaving the burdened raid* terminology
behind and name the btrfs redundancy modes more clearly by what they
do. For instance "-d double|triple" or "-d 2n|3n". And for raid5/6 "-d
single-parity|double-parity" or "-d n+1|n+2".
Regards,
Bart
--
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
This would be pretty excellent - there's a real need for a storage
system where you can just give it a bunch of disks and a policy, and let
the system worry about the details. Current RAID implementations are
pretty inflexible, for example when dealing with disks of varying size.
--Ravi
--
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
