On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 11:25:47AM +0100, Hugo Mills <hugo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > The reason I chose data=single was specifically to help in case of device
> > loss at the cost of performance.
>
> Make backups. That's the only way to be sure about this sort of thing.
I think you are unthinkingly repeating a wrong (and slightly dangerous)
claim - backups cannot actually do that sort of thing: a raid will protect
against (some amount of) disk failures with no data loss, but backups
cannot: Backups can protect against complete data loss, but cannot
completely protect against data loss.
> With single data, *chunk allocation* will go to the device with the
> largest amount of unallocated space. If your data is WORM
That is definitely not the case with 5.4 - I added two disks to an
existing filesystem and copied 8TB onto it with btrfs receive, resulting
in about 3800G used on both new disks, with Data=single. I repeated it by
creating a 5 disk-fs and 1TB of data and got prettyx even distribution.
--
The choice of a Deliantra, the free code+content MORPG
-----==- _GNU_ http://www.deliantra.net
----==-- _ generation
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / schmorp@xxxxxxxxxx
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\
