Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 12:10:01 -0500 Jerry Feldman <gaf at blu.org> wrote: > Ok, question answered. > So if I currently had a RAID1(/dev/mdn == /dev/sdxn + /dev/sdyn) > ThenI would achieve roughly the same benefits with btrfs -d raid1. Roughly. It gets a little complicated with more than 2 devices and with non-identical devices. Btrfs uses a balancing algorithm to distribute extents across multiple devices as evenly as possible. It's a lot like AdvFS this way. > In RAID, the third drive would effectively be a hot spare. What would > btrfs do with the third drive. In the default, Let's say that you have 3 x 1TB disks. "btrfs -d raid1 sda sdb sdc" would create a volume with 1.5TB capacity. Any data or metadata written to sda will be replicated on either sdb or sdc based on the balancing algorithm. A single device fault will not result in lost data since every extent on that device is replicated on one of the other two. If you created a volume with 2 of the disks, "btrfs -d raid1 sda sdb", then you would have a volume with 1TB capacity and an unused disk. If either sda or sdb faults then you could swap sdc in to replace the faulted disk. The same three disks in a "-d raid0" set would make a volume with 3TB capacity. Loss of any one of the three disks will cause data loss. -- Rich P.
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |