Le 21 February 2012 ? 07:54, Hugo Mills a écrit: > Some time ago, I proposed the following scheme: > > <n>C<m>S<p>P > > where n is the number of copies (suffixed by C), m is the number of > stripes for that data (suffixed by S), and p is the number of parity > blocks (suffixed by P). Values of zero are omitted. > > So btrfs's RAID-1 would be 2C, RAID-0 would be 1CnS, RAID-5 would > be 1CnS1P, and RAID-6 would be 1CnS2P. DUP would need a special > indicator to show that it wasn't redundant in the face of a whole-disk > failure: 2CN
Seems clear. However, is the S really relevant ? It would be simpler without it, wouldn't it ? -- Xavier Nicollet -- 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
