Hendrik Friedel wrote:
Hello,
I intend to move to BTRFS and of course I have some data already.
I currently have several single 4TB drives and I would like to move the
Data onto new drives (2*8TB). I need no raid, as I prefer a backup.
Nevertheless, having raid nice for availability. So why not in the end.
I currently use ~6TB, so it may work, but I would be able to remove the
redundancy later.
So, if I understand correctly, today I want
-m raid1 -d raid1
whereas later, I want
-m raid1 -d single
What is very important to me is, that with one failing drive, I have no
risk of losing the whole filesystem, but only losing the affected drive.
Is that possible with both of these variants?
Is it possible to move between the two (doing a balance, of course?
Any other thoughts/recommendations?
If I where you, with your use case I would consider using mhddfs
https://romanrm.net/mhddfs which is filesystem agnostic layer on top of
2x [-m DUP, -d SINGLE] BTRFS drives. Last time I tested mhddfs (about 5+
years ago) it was dead slow, but that might not be very important to
you. For what it does it works great!
If you label your device DISK_A and DISK_B and then your backups
BACKUP_A and BACKUP_B you just have to copy back the A or B set if one
disk fails.
And before Duncan jumps in , remember that backup is not a backup unless
it has a extra backup ... But seriously (really, seriously!!), read any
of Duncan's posts. He does a stellar job of explaining why you need to
have have tested, working backups of data you care about!
Greetings,
Hendrik
