Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

On 2016-06-05 16:31, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: On Sun, 2016-06-05 at 09:36 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: That's ridiculous. It isn't incorrect to refer to only 2 copies as raid1. No, if there are only two devices then not. But obviously we're talking about how btrfs does RAID1, in which

Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > On Sun, 2016-06-05 at 09:36 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: >> That's ridiculous. It isn't incorrect to refer to only 2 copies as >> raid1. > No, if there are only two devices then not. > But obviously we're

Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

On Sun, 2016-06-05 at 09:36 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > That's ridiculous. It isn't incorrect to refer to only 2 copies as > raid1. No, if there are only two devices then not. But obviously we're talking about how btrfs does RAID1, in which even with n>2 devices there are only 2 copies - that's

Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > Well the RAID1 was IMHO still bad choice as it's pretty ambiguous. That's ridiculous. It isn't incorrect to refer to only 2 copies as raid1. You have to explicitly ask both mdadm and lvcreate for the number

Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

On Sun, 2016-06-05 at 02:41 +0200, Brendan Hide wrote: > The "questionable reason" is simply the fact that it is, now as well > as  > at the time the features were added, the closest existing > terminology  > that best describes what it does. Even now, it would be difficult on > the  > spot

Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

On 06/03/16 20:59, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: On Fri, 2016-06-03 at 13:42 -0500, Mitchell Fossen wrote: Thanks for pointing that out, so if I'm thinking correctly, with RAID1 it's just that there is a copy of the data somewhere on some other drive. With RAID10, there's still only 1

Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

> Mitchell wrote: > With RAID10, there's still only 1 other copy, but the entire "original" disk is mirrored to another one, right? No, full disks are never mirrored in any configuration. Here's how I understand Btrfs' non-parity redundancy profiles: single: only a single instance of a file

Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

On Fri, 2016-06-03 at 13:42 -0500, Mitchell Fossen wrote: > Thanks for pointing that out, so if I'm thinking correctly, with > RAID1 > it's just that there is a copy of the data somewhere on some other > drive. > > With RAID10, there's still only 1 other copy, but the entire > "original" > disk

Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

Thanks for pointing that out, so if I'm thinking correctly, with RAID1 it's just that there is a copy of the data somewhere on some other drive. With RAID10, there's still only 1 other copy, but the entire "original" disk is mirrored to another one, right? On Fri, 2016-06-03 at 20:13 +0200,

Re: RAID1 vs RAID10 and best way to set up 6 disks

On Fri, 2016-06-03 at 13:10 -0500, Mitchell Fossen wrote: > Is there any caveats between RAID1 on all 6 vs RAID10? Just to be safe: RAID1 in btrfs means not what RAID1 means in any other terminology about RAID. The former has only two duplicates, the later means full mirroring of all devices.