I am on 4.15.5 :) Yes I agree that Journaling is better on the same array, still should be unit failure tolerant, so maybe it should go in a RAID1 scheme. Will a raid56 array built with older kernel be compatible with the new forecoming code? Bye
2018-03-21 18:24 GMT+01:00 Liu Bo <obuil.li...@gmail.com>: > On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 9:50 AM, Menion <men...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi all >> I am trying to understand the status of RAID5/6 in BTRFS >> I know that there are some discussion ongoing on the RFC patch >> proposed by Liu bo >> But it seems that everything stopped last summary. Also it mentioned >> about a "separate disk for journal", does it mean that the final >> implementation of RAID5/6 will require a dedicated HDD for the >> journaling? > > Thanks for the interest on btrfs and raid56. > > The patch set is to plug write hole, which is very rare in practice, tbh. > The feedback is to use existing space instead of another dedicate > "fast device" as the journal in order to get some extent of raid > protection. I'd need some time to pick it up. > > With that being said, we have several data reconstruction fixes for > raid56 (esp. raid6) in 4.15, I'd say please deploy btrfs with the > upstream kernel or some distros which do kernel updates frequently, > the most important one is > > 8810f7517a3b Btrfs: make raid6 rebuild retry more > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10091755/ > > AFAIK, no other data corruptions showed up. > > thanks, > liubo -- 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
