On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 16:41 +1100, Dmitri Nikulin wrote: > On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 8:04 AM, Brian J. Murrell <brian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> A more complete solution, that requires no software changes, would be > >> to have 3 or 4 disks. A stripe for really fast reads and writes, and > >> another disk (or another stripe) to act as a slave to the data being > >> written to the primary stripe. This seems to do what you want, at a > >> small price premium. > > > > No. That's not really what I am describing at all. > > Well you get the bandwidth of 2 disks when reading and writing, and > still mirrored to a second stripe as time permits. Kind of like > delayed RAID10. > > > I apologize if my original description was unclear. Hopefully it is > > more so now. > > Yes. It'll be up to the actual filesystem devs to weigh in on whether > it's worth implementing. > It's an interesting idea, but I think we've got fast front end devices higher up on the todo list. That will still support the destaging to slower disks idea, but will be more flexible overall. -chris -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
