From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Mason Subject: Re: parity data Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2008 10:47:51 -0400 Message-ID: <1220885271.8537.31.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> References: <1220766185.20018.7.camel@telesto> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: linux-btrfs To: Eric Anopolsky Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1220766185.20018.7.camel@telesto> List-ID: On Sat, 2008-09-06 at 23:43 -0600, Eric Anopolsky wrote: > Hi, > > A couple of questions. > > 1. Does btrfs currently have anything like raid 5 or 6? > Not yet, it might one day. > 2. One guy on my LUG's mailing list is really excited about the > potential for setting redundancy on a per-file basis. > I.e. /home/eric/criticalfile gets mirrored across all of the drives in > the filesystem but /home/eric/temporaryfile gets striped. I'm skeptical. > Is it a good idea to allow people/programs to do this? In general, yes. Some files or directories are crucial, and some (swap for example) don't need to survive a crash. But, I think the flexibility should go a little further. The goal is to be able to define drive groups and tie files or directory trees to the drive groups. That way you can say these files go to the fastest drives and these files go to some other drive type, etc etc. -chris