On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 6:13 AM, Hugo Mills h...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 01:20:20PM +0200, Brendan Hide wrote:
On 2012/12/17 06:23 PM, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 04:51:33PM +0100, Sebastien Luttringer wrote:
Hello,
snip
I get the feeling that RAID1 only
On 2012/12/17 06:23 PM, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 04:51:33PM +0100, Sebastien Luttringer wrote:
Hello,
snip
I get the feeling that RAID1 only allow one disk removing. Which is more
a RAID5 feature.
The RAID-1 support in btrfs makes exactly two copies of each item
of data,
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 01:20:20PM +0200, Brendan Hide wrote:
On 2012/12/17 06:23 PM, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 04:51:33PM +0100, Sebastien Luttringer wrote:
Hello,
snip
I get the feeling that RAID1 only allow one disk removing. Which is more
a RAID5 feature.
The RAID-1
Hello,
I'm testing Btrfs RAID1 feature on 3 disks of ~10GB. Last one is not
exactly 10GB (would be too easy).
About the test machine, it's a kvm vm running an up-to-date archlinux
with linux 3.7 and btrfs-progs 0.19.20121005.
#uname -a
Linux seblu-btrfs-1 3.7.0-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Tue Dec 11
Hello Sebastien,
with btrfs raid1 you get two copies of each extent on separate drives.
That means you can lose one drive only, no matter how many drives are
in the set. It's not traditional raid1, which is probably what you are
confusing it with. Having raid1 with more than 2n-redudancy is not
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 04:51:33PM +0100, Sebastien Luttringer wrote:
Hello,
I'm testing Btrfs RAID1 feature on 3 disks of ~10GB. Last one is not
exactly 10GB (would be too easy).
About the test machine, it's a kvm vm running an up-to-date archlinux
with linux 3.7 and btrfs-progs
