On 14/02/13 15:01, Greg Troxel wrote:
> 
> thierry dijoux <[email protected]> writes:
> 
>> Thanks Paul for the reply.
>> Just did the test, and a "tahoe check --repair" doesn't rebalance the file.
>> I also try a deep-check --repair, no more success.
> 
> I suspect it would be good to have two notions of "healthy", one based
> on enough shares, and one based on meeting the distribution criteria.  I
> see the "should be 1 and 1 but is 2 and 0" situation as scarier than
> "should be 10 on 10 servers, but is 9 on 9 servers".

That's covered by
<https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/ticket/1784> and
<https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/ticket/614>.

-- 
David-Sarah Hopwood ⚥

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
tahoe-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://tahoe-lafs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tahoe-dev

Reply via email to