On Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 5:16 AM, Goffredo Baroncelli <kreijack@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> anyone on when/why to use different RAID geometries for data & metadata? >> > > I expected that the size of data and meta-data are different by several order > of magnitude. So I can choice different trade-off between > space/speed/reliability for data and/or metadata. > > If I need speed I can put the meta-data in a "fast" raid (like raid10) and put > the data in a slow raid (like raid6). > Or if I can tolerate the lost of data, I can put the meta-data in raid1 and > the data in raid0. A fault of a disk, may lead to lost of data, but not to > lost of the meta-data (the file-system is fully working). sounds like there's no further, subtle considerations beyond the usual "which RAID" considerations. then, i suppose that as long as i find RAID-10 "good enough"(as it has been in the md-case), there's no compelling reason NOT tp place both data/metadata in RAID-10 constructs in btrfs. thanks. -- 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
