Am Montag, 7. Mai 2012 schrieb Helmut Hullen: > > If you want to survive losing a single disk without the (absolute) > > fear of the whole filesystem breaking you have to have some sort of > > redundancy either by separating filesystems or using some version of > > raid other than raid0. > > No - since some years I use a kind of outsourced backup. A copy of > all data is on a bundle of disks somewhere in the neighbourhood. As > mentionend: the data isn't business critical, it's just "nice to > have". It's not worth something like raid1 or so (with twice the costs > of a non raid solution).
Thats not true when you use BTRFS RAID1 with three disks. BTRFS will only store each chunk on two different drives then, not on all three. Such it is not twice the cost, but given all three drives have the same capacity about one and a half times the cost. Consider the time to recover the files from the outsourced backup. Maybe it does make up the money you would have to spend for one additional harddisk. Anyway, I agree with the others responding to your post that this one harddisk died and I do not see a kernel version related issue. Any striped RAID 0 would have failed in that case. And you can use three BTRFS filesystems the same way as three Ext4 filesystems if you prefer such a setup if the time spent for restoring the backup does not make up the cost for one additional disk for you. -- Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7 -- 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
