Re: Recommended why to use btrfs for production?

[Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>]

Chris Murphy posted on Thu, 09 Jun 2016 11:39:23 -0600 as excerpted:

> Yeah but somewhere there's a chunk that's likely affected by two losses,
> with a probability much higher than for conventional raid10 where such a
> loss is very binary: if the loss is a mirrored pair, the whole array and
> filesystem implodes; if the loss does not affect an entire mirrored
> pair, the whole array survives.
> 
> The thing with Btrfs raid 10 is you can't really tell in advance to what
> degree you have loss. It's not a binary condition, it has a gray area
> where a lot of data can still be retrieved, but the instant you hit
> missing data it's a loss, and if you hit missing metadata then the fs
> will either go read only or crash, it just can't continue. So that
> "walking on egg shells" behavior in a 2+ drive loss is really different
> from a conventional raid10 where it's either gonna completely work or
> completely fail.

Yes, thanks, CMurphy.  That's exactly what I was trying to explain. =:^)

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman