similar to: btrfs raid0

If there is no free space, the free space allocator will try to get space from the block group with the degenerated profile. For example, if there is no free space in the RAID1 block groups, the allocator will try to allocate space from the DUP block groups. And besides that, the space reservation has the similar behaviour: if there is no enough space in the space cache to reserve, it will reserve

hi guys, gals do you know if conversion from lvm's raid10 to raid0 is possible? I'm fiddling with --splitmirrors but it gets me nowhere. On "takeover" subject man pages says: "..between striped/raid0 and raid10."" but no details, nowhere I could find documentation, nor a howto. many thanks, L.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I''ve been unable to find anything definitive about what happens if I use RAID0 to join an SSD and HDD together with respect to performance (latency, throughput). The future is obvious (hot data tracking, using most appropriate device for the data, data migration). In my specific case I have a 250GB SSD and a 500GB HDD, and about 250GB of

Hi, I''m starting to play with btrfs on my new computer. I''m running Gentoo and have compiled the 2.6.31 kernel, enabling btrfs. Now I have 2 partitions (on 2 different sata disks) that are free for me to play with, each about 375 gb in size. I wanted to create a "raid1" volume using these two partitions, so I did: # mkfs.btrfs -d raid1 /dev/sda5 /dev/sdb5 # mount

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Is it ( yet? ) possible to manipulate the allocation policy on a subvolume level instead of the fs level? For example, to make / use raid1, and /home use raid0? Or to have / allocated from an ssd and /home allocated from the giant 2tb hd. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -

My computer running CentOS 7 is configured to use BIOS RAID0 and has two identical SSDs which are also encrypted. I had a crash the other day and due to a bug in the operating system update, I am unable to boot the system in RAID mode since dracut does not recognize the disks in grub. After modifying the grub command line I am able to boot the system from one of the harddisks after entering the

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Eliezer Croitoru <eliezer at ngtech.co.il> wrote: > I am unsure I understand what you wrote. > "XFS will create multiple AG's across all of those > devices," > Are you comparing md linear/concat to md raid0? and that the upper level XFS > will run on top them? Yes to the first question, I'm not understanding the second

Hi, i have some questions when using Btrfs on multi-devices: 1. a large file will always be stored wholely on a device or it may spread on some devices/partitions? Btrfs has option to specify it explicitly? 2. suppose i have a directory tree like that: Dir_1  |--> file_1A  |--> file_1B  |--> Dir_2          |--> file_2C          |--> file_2D If Dir_2, file_2C  on a failed device,

On 11/04/2020 10:21 PM, John Pierce wrote: > is it RAID 0 (striped) or raid1 (mirrored) ?? > > if you wrote on half of a raid0 stripe set, you basically trashed it. > blocks are striped across both drives, so like 16k on the first disk, then > 16k on the 2nd then 16k back on the first, repeat (replace 16k with > whatever your raid stripe size is). > > if its a raid 1

Hallo, "never change a running system" ... For some months I run btrfs unter kernel 3.2.5 and 3.2.9, without problems. Yesterday I compiled kernel 3.3.4, and this morning I started the machine with this kernel. There may be some ugly problems. Copying something into the btrfs "directory" worked well for some files, and then I got error messages (I''ve not

> On Nov 4, 2020, at 9:21 PM, John Pierce <jhn.pierce at gmail.com> wrote: > > is it RAID 0 (striped) or raid1 (mirrored) ?? > > if you wrote on half of a raid0 stripe set, you basically trashed it. > blocks are striped across both drives, so like 16k on the first disk, then > 16k on the 2nd then 16k back on the first, repeat (replace 16k with > whatever your raid

Hi What is the general state of btrfs RAID6 as of kernel 3.13-rc1 and the latest btrfs tools? More specifically: - Is it able to correct errors during scrubs? - Is it able to transparently handle disk failures without downtime? - Is it possible to convert btrfs RAID10 to RAID6 without recreating the fs? - Is it possible to add/remove drives to a RAID6 array? Regards, Hans-Kristian -- To

Greetings, until yesterday I was running a btrfs filesystem across two 2.0 TiB disks in RAID1 mode for both metadata and data without any problems. As space was getting short I wanted to extend the filesystem by two additional drives lying around, which both are 1.0 TiB in size. Knowing little about the btrfs RAID implementation I thought I had to switch to RAID10 mode, which I was told is

Hi, I do have a disk array that is providing striped LUNs to my Solaris box. Hence I''d like to simply concat those LUNs without adding another layer of striping. Is this possibile with ZFS? As far as I understood, if I use zpool create myPool lun-1 lun-2 ... lun-n I will get a RAID0 striping where each data block is split across all "n" LUNs. If that''s

Hallo, linux-btrfs, First I create an array of 2 disks with mkfs.btrfs -d raid0 -m raid1 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdd1 and mount it at /srv/MM. Then I fill it with about 1,6 TByte. And then I add /dev/sde1 via btrfs device add /dev/sde1 /srv/MM btrfs filesystem balance /srv/MM (it run about 20 hours) Then I work on it, copy some new files, delete some old files - all works well. Only df

Hi All. I have a server which uses RAID10 made of 4 partitions for / and boots from it. It looks like so: mdadm -D /dev/md1 /dev/md1: Version : 00.90 Creation Time : Mon Apr 27 09:25:05 2009 Raid Level : raid10 Array Size : 973827968 (928.71 GiB 997.20 GB) Used Dev Size : 486913984 (464.36 GiB 498.60 GB) Raid Devices : 4 Total Devices : 4 Preferred Minor : 1

Hello! I have a 1 TB ext4 drive that''s quite full (~50 GB free space, though I could free up another 100 GB or so if necessary) and two empty 0.5 TB drives. Is it possible to get another 1 TB drive and combine the four drives to a btrfs raid10 setup without (if all goes well) losing my data? Regards, Paul -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe

Hallo, linux-btrfs, please delete the option "-L" (for labelling) in "mkfs.btrfs", in some configurations it doesn''t work as expected. My usual way: mkfs.btrfs -d raid0 -m raid1 /dev/sdb /dev/sdc /dev/sdd ... One call for some devices. Wenn I add the option "-L mylabel" then each device gets the same label, and therefore some other programs

I'm trying to work out the kinks of a proprietary, old, and clunky application that runs on CentOS. One of its main problems is that it writes image sequences extremely non-linearly and in several passes, using many CPUs, so the sequences get very fragmented. The obvious solution to this seems to be to use SSDs for its output, and some scripts that will pick up and copy our the sequences

I''m a little concerned about the size of my metadata. I''m doing raid10 on both data and metadata, and: hrm@vlad:mnt $ sudo btrfs fi df /mnt Data: total=488.01GB, used=487.23GB Metadata: total=3.01GB, used=677.73MB System: total=11.88MB, used=52.00KB hrm@vlad:mnt $ find /mnt | wc -l 20137 By my calculations, that''s something on the order of 17.5K per filesystem