Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

Chris Murphy posted on Thu, 09 Jun 2016 11:39:23 -0600 as excerpted: > Yeah but somewhere there's a chunk that's likely affected by two losses, > with a probability much higher than for conventional raid10 where such a > loss is very binary: if the loss is a mirrored pair, the whole array and >

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 5:38 AM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > On 2016-06-09 02:16, Duncan wrote: >> >> Austin S. Hemmelgarn posted on Fri, 03 Jun 2016 10:21:12 -0400 as >> excerpted: >> >>> As far as BTRFS raid10 mode in general, there are a few things that are >>> important

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

On 2016-06-09 02:16, Duncan wrote: Austin S. Hemmelgarn posted on Fri, 03 Jun 2016 10:21:12 -0400 as excerpted: As far as BTRFS raid10 mode in general, there are a few things that are important to remember about it: 1. It stores exactly two copies of everything, any extra disks just add to the

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

Austin S. Hemmelgarn posted on Fri, 03 Jun 2016 10:21:12 -0400 as excerpted: > As far as BTRFS raid10 mode in general, there are a few things that are > important to remember about it: > 1. It stores exactly two copies of everything, any extra disks just add > to the stripe length on each copy.

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

On 2016-06-05 22:40, James Johnston wrote: On 06/06/2016 at 01:47, Chris Murphy wrote: On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 4:45 AM, Mladen Milinkovic wrote: On 06/03/2016 04:05 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: Make certain the kernel command timer value is greater than the driver error

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

On 2016-06-03 21:48, Chris Murphy wrote: On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 6:48 PM, Nicholas D Steeves wrote: On 3 June 2016 at 11:33, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: On 2016-06-03 10:11, Martin wrote: Make certain the kernel command timer value is greater than

RE: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

On 06/06/2016 at 01:47, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 4:45 AM, Mladen Milinkovic > wrote: > > On 06/03/2016 04:05 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > >> Make certain the kernel command timer value is greater than the driver > >> error recovery timeout. The former is

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 4:45 AM, Mladen Milinkovic wrote: > On 06/03/2016 04:05 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >> Make certain the kernel command timer value is greater than the driver >> error recovery timeout. The former is found in sysfs, per block >> device, the latter can be

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

05.06.2016 19:33, James Johnston пишет: > On 06/05/2016 10:46 AM, Mladen Milinkovic wrote: >> On 06/03/2016 04:05 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >>> Make certain the kernel command timer value is greater than the driver >>> error recovery timeout. The former is found in sysfs, per block >>> device, the

RE: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

On 06/05/2016 10:46 AM, Mladen Milinkovic wrote: > On 06/03/2016 04:05 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > > Make certain the kernel command timer value is greater than the driver > > error recovery timeout. The former is found in sysfs, per block > > device, the latter can be get and set with smartctl.

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

On 06/03/2016 04:05 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > Make certain the kernel command timer value is greater than the driver > error recovery timeout. The former is found in sysfs, per block > device, the latter can be get and set with smartctl. Wrong > configuration is common (it's actually the default)

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 6:48 PM, Nicholas D Steeves wrote: > On 3 June 2016 at 11:33, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: >> On 2016-06-03 10:11, Martin wrote: Make certain the kernel command timer value is greater than the driver error recovery

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 8:11 AM, Martin wrote: >> Make certain the kernel command timer value is greater than the driver >> error recovery timeout. The former is found in sysfs, per block >> device, the latter can be get and set with smartctl. Wrong >> configuration is

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

On 3 June 2016 at 11:33, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > On 2016-06-03 10:11, Martin wrote: >>> >>> Make certain the kernel command timer value is greater than the driver >>> error recovery timeout. The former is found in sysfs, per block >>> device, the latter can be get and

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

Hey. Does anyone know whether the write hole issues have been fixed already? https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/RAID56 still mentions it. Cheers, Chris. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

On 2016-06-03 10:11, Martin wrote: Make certain the kernel command timer value is greater than the driver error recovery timeout. The former is found in sysfs, per block device, the latter can be get and set with smartctl. Wrong configuration is common (it's actually the default) when using

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

> I would say it is, but I also don't have quite as much experience with it as > with BTRFS raid1 mode. The one thing I do know for certain about it is that > even if it theoretically could recover from two failed disks (ie, if they're > from different positions in the striping of each mirror),

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

On 2016-06-03 09:31, Martin wrote: In general, avoid Ubuntu LTS versions when dealing with BTRFS, as well as most enterprise distros, they all tend to back-port patches instead of using newer kernels, which means it's functionally impossible to provide good support for them here (because we

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

> Make certain the kernel command timer value is greater than the driver > error recovery timeout. The former is found in sysfs, per block > device, the latter can be get and set with smartctl. Wrong > configuration is common (it's actually the default) when using > consumer drives, and inevitably

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > > That said, there are other options. If you have enough disks, you can run > BTRFS raid1 on top of LVM or MD RAID5 or RAID6, which provides you with the > benefits of both. There is a trade off. Either mdadm

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

On 06/03/2016 03:31 PM, Martin wrote: In general, avoid Ubuntu LTS versions when dealing with BTRFS, as well as most enterprise distros, they all tend to back-port patches instead of using newer kernels, which means it's functionally impossible to provide good support for them here (because we

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

> In general, avoid Ubuntu LTS versions when dealing with BTRFS, as well as > most enterprise distros, they all tend to back-port patches instead of using > newer kernels, which means it's functionally impossible to provide good > support for them here (because we can't know for sure what exactly

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

On 2016-06-03 05:49, Martin wrote: Hello, We would like to use urBackup to make laptop backups, and they mention btrfs as an option. https://www.urbackup.org/administration_manual.html#x1-8400010.6 So if we go with btrfs and we need 100TB usable space in raid6, and to have it replicated each

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

> Before trying RAID5/6 in production, be sure to read posts like these: > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-btrfs/msg55642.html Very interesting post and very recent even. If I decide to try raid6 and of course everything is replicated each day (for a bit of a safety net), and disks begin to

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

Hi Martin, On 06/03/2016 11:49 AM, Martin wrote: We would like to use urBackup to make laptop backups, and they mention btrfs as an option. [...] And a bonus question: How stable is raid6 and detecting and replacing failed drives? Before trying RAID5/6 in production, be sure to read posts

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

> Do you plan to use Snapshots? How many of them? Yes, minimum 7 for each day of the week. Nice to have would be 4 extra for each week of the month and then 12 for each month of the year. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to

Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 11:49:09AM +0200, Martin wrote: > We would like to use urBackup to make laptop backups, and they mention > btrfs as an option. > > https://www.urbackup.org/administration_manual.html#x1-8400010.6 > > So if we go with btrfs and we need 100TB usable space in raid6, and to >

Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

Hello, We would like to use urBackup to make laptop backups, and they mention btrfs as an option. https://www.urbackup.org/administration_manual.html#x1-8400010.6 So if we go with btrfs and we need 100TB usable space in raid6, and to have it replicated each night to another btrfs server for