Re: btrfs raid

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

 



On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Rich Freeman <rich0@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 4:07 PM, Chris Murphy <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 5:01 AM, Rich Freeman <rich0@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> I think it depends on how you define "old."  I think that 3.18.28
>>> would be fine as it is a supported longterm.
>>
>> For raid56? I disagree. There were substantial raid56 code changes in
>> 3.19 that were not backported to 3.18.
>
> Of course.  I was referring to raid1.

Oops. Sorry. Yeah it should be safe. But still there's thousands of
bug fixes that don't get backported even to longterm releases. I
personally wouldn't risk it since there's another option. I guess it
is sort of weighing the bugs you know with the older one, versus the
bugs you don't know with the newer one.


 I wouldn't run raid56 without
> an expectation of occasionally losing everything on any version of
> linux.  :)  If I were just testing it or I could tolerate losing
> everything occasionally I'd probably track the current stable, if not
> mainline, depending on my goals.

Yeah exactly.


-- 
Chris Murphy
--
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