Hallo, Martin, Du meintest am 08.05.12: >> No - since some years I use a kind of outsourced backup. A copy of >> all data is on a bundle of disks somewhere in the neighbourhood. >> As mentionend: the data isn't business critical, it's just "nice to >> have". It's not worth something like raid1 or so (with twice the >> costs of a non raid solution). > Thats not true when you use BTRFS RAID1 with three disks. BTRFS will > only store each chunk on two different drives then, not on all three. > Such it is not twice the cost, but given all three drives have the > same capacity about one and a half times the cost. > Consider the time to recover the files from the outsourced backup. > Maybe it does make up the money you would have to spend for one > additional harddisk. I have considered it, many times. And the result is unchanged: no RAID1. It doesn't replace a real backup. > Anyway, I agree with the others responding to your post that this one > harddisk died and I do not see a kernel version related issue. Any > striped RAID 0 would have failed in that case. Yes - I had written yesterday that the disk is dead. One of three disks. I'm on the way restoring (from backup) the three disks. > And you can use three BTRFS filesystems the same way as three Ext4 > filesystems if you prefer such a setup if the time spent for > restoring the backup does not make up the cost for one additional > disk for you. But where's the gain? If a disk fails I have a lot of tools for repairing an ext2/3/4 system. Viele Gruesse! Helmut -- 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
