Hi On 05/02/2018 03:47 AM, Duncan wrote: > Gandalf Corvotempesta posted on Tue, 01 May 2018 21:57:59 +0000 as > excerpted: > >> Hi to all I've found some patches from Andrea Mazzoleni that adds >> support up to 6 parity raid. >> Why these are wasn't merged ? >> With modern disk size, having something greater than 2 parity, would be >> great. > 1) [...] the parity isn't checksummed, ....
Why the fact that the parity is not checksummed is a problem ? I read several times that this is a problem. However each time the thread reached the conclusion that... it is not a problem. So again, which problem would solve having the parity checksummed ? On the best of my knowledge nothing. In any case the data is checksummed so it is impossible to return corrupted data (modulo bug :-) ). On the other side, having the parity would increase both the code complexity and the write amplification, because every time a part of the stripe is touched not only the parity has to be updated, but also the checksum has too.. BR G.Baroncelli -- gpg @keyserver.linux.it: Goffredo Baroncelli <kreijackATinwind.it> Key fingerprint BBF5 1610 0B64 DAC6 5F7D 17B2 0EDA 9B37 8B82 E0B5 -- 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
