Hi Matan, On 04/29/2017 10:47 PM, Matan Liram wrote: > LRC low level plugin configuration of the following example copes with a > single erasure while it can easily protect from two. > > In case I use the layers: > 1: DDDDDDc_ _ > 2: DDD_ _ _ _c_ > 3: _ _ _DDD_ _c > > Neither of the rules protect from 2 failures. However, if we calculate the > XOR of the two local parities we can treat the calculated value as a second > parity disk and cope with two erasures. > This thread discusses the same issue, while according to my understanding it > doesn't provide a solution. > http://www.spinics.net/lists/ceph-devel/msg19886.html > > Is there a way to make the proposed construction cope with 2 erasures? A few > modifications are acceptable.
I'm not sure to understand what you're asking. Would you mind rephrasing ? 1: DDDDDDc_ _ 2: DDD_ _ _ _c_ 3: _ _ _DDD_ _c 1: DDDDDDc_ __ 2: DDD_ _ _ _c__ 3: _ _ _DDD_ _cc That would not work ? Cheers > > Thank you, > Matan Liram > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list > ceph-users@lists.ceph.com > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com > -- Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
