On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 07:15:12PM +0100, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
> Hello,
>
> these are only my thoughts; no code here, but I would like to share
> it hoping that it could be useful.
>
> As reported several times by Zygo (and others), one of the problem of
> raid5/6 is the write hole. Today BTR
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 03:58:06PM -0500, Chris Mason wrote:
>
>
> On 11/16/2016 11:10 AM, David Sterba wrote:
> >On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 09:55:34AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> >>At 11/12/2016 04:22 AM, Liu Bo wrote:
> >>>On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 02:47:42PM +0800, Wang Xiaoguang wrote:
> If we u
On 2016-11-18 21:34, Timofey Titovets wrote:
[...]
>> For example, if a filesystem - RAID5 is composed by 4 DISK, the filesystem
>> should have three BGs:
>> BG #1,composed by two disks (1 data+ 1 parity)
>> BG #2 composed by three disks (2 data + 1 parity)
>> BG #3 composed by four disks (3 data
On 2016-11-18 21:32, Janos Toth F. wrote:
> Based on the comments of this patch, stripe size could theoretically
> go as low as 512 byte:
AFAIK the kernel uses a pagesize of 4k (or greater in some architecture). So
doesn't make sense to use a so small size.
GB
--
gpg @keyserver.linux.it: Goffr
On 2016-11-19 09:22, Zygo Blaxell wrote:
[...]
>> If the data to be written has a size of 4k, it will be allocated to
>> the BG #1. If the data to be written has a size of 8k, it will be
>> allocated to the BG #2 If the data to be written has a size of 12k,
>> it will be allocated to the BG #3 If
On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 12:20 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn
wrote:
> On 2016-11-17 15:05, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>
>> I think the wiki should be updated to reflect that raid1 and raid10
>> are mostly OK. I think it's grossly misleading to consider either as
>> green/OK when a single degraded read write m
