Re: [PATCH RFC] btrfs: csum: Introduce partial csum for tree block.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 09:26:11AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> > I agree with that. I'm still not convinced that adding all the kernel
> > code to repair the data is justified, compared to the block-level
> > redundancy alternatives.
> 
> Totally agree with this.
> That's why we have support for RAID1/5/6/10.
> 
> I also hate to add complexity to kernel codes, especially when the scrub 
> codes are already quite complex.
> 
> But in fact, my teammate Zhao Lei is already doing some work to make 
> scrub codes clean and neat.

Doing cleanups is a good thing regardless of new features, please don't
hesitate to post them even if we do not agree to implement the partial
csum/repair.

I'm not against adding the partial csums & repair, but at the moment I'm
not convinced.
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux