Chris Murphy posted on Tue, 04 Nov 2014 11:28:39 -0700 as excerpted: >> It needs to be more than a sequential number. If one of the disks >> disappears we need to record this fact on the surviving disks, and also >> cope with _both_ disks claiming to be the "surviving" one. > > I agree this is also a problem. But the most common case is where we > know that sda generation is newer (larger value) and most recently > modified, and sdb has not since been modified but needs to be caught up. > As far as I know the only way to do that on Btrfs right now is a full > balance, it doesn't catch up just be being reconnected with a normal > mount.
I thought it was a scrub that would take care of that, not a balance? (Maybe do both to be sure?) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- 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
