From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from m.nv-systems.net ([176.9.99.115]:44561 "EHLO m.nv-systems.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751530AbaFXVss (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2014 17:48:48 -0400 Message-ID: <53A9F246.2040509@nv-systems.net> Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 23:48:54 +0200 From: Gerald Hopf MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Roman Mamedov CC: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: "-d single" for data blocks on a multiple devices doesn't work as it should References: <53A955F8.8090101@nv-systems.net> <20140624170236.28d5bfa9@natsu> In-Reply-To: <20140624170236.28d5bfa9@natsu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 24.06.2014 13:02, Roman Mamedov wrote: > If you want to join multiple devices with a per-file granularity (so > that a single file is wholely stored on one given device), check out > the FUSE filesystem called mhddfs; I wrote an article about it some > time ago: https://romanrm.net/mhddfs Thank you very much for this excellent recommendation. I had never heard of this layered "filesystem" before. And I have to admit, I was initially quite skeptical of your mhddfs recommendation, because of... well... FUSE :-) But I read your article and the mhddfs documentation and it is exactly the solution I had in mind (where trouble on one of the disks does never ever affect data on other disks). mhddfs performance is also great, 130MB/s at only 50% load on one of the cpu's cores - it does only seem to be limited by the disk and not by the CPU or FUSE. Thanks again. I will now use mhddfs for my backups. And even though I'm now not using btrfs for my backups, having a perfectly working backup solution will make it much more likely for me to use BTFS on my main disk array once the btrfs RAID5/6 support is slightly more complete :-) Thanks again, Gerald