On 2017-04-07 12:04, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 5:41 AM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn
<ahferroin7@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm rather fond of running BTRFS raid1 on top of LVM RAID0 volumes,
which while it provides no better data safety than BTRFS raid10 mode, gets
noticeably better performance.
This does in fact have better data safety than Btrfs raid10 because it
is possible to lose more than one drive without data loss. You can
only lose drives on one side of the mirroring, however. This is a
conventional raid0+1, so it's not as scalable as raid10 when it comes
to rebuild time.
That's a good point that I don't often remember, and I'm pretty sure
that such an array will rebuild slower from a single device loss than
BTRFS raid10 would, but most of that should be that BTRFS is smart
enough to only rewrite what it has to.
--
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
