From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: cwillu Subject: Re: kernel 3.3.4 damages filesystem (?) Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 15:27:32 -0600 Message-ID: References: <4FA835D7.3040207@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org To: helmut@hullen.de Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-ID: On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Helmut Hullen wrot= e: > Hallo, Daniel, > > Du meintest am 07.05.12: > >>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0mkfs.btrfs =C2=A0-m raid1 -d raid0 >>> >>> with 3 disks gives me a "cluster" which looks like 1 disk/partition= / >>> directory. >>> If one disk fails nothing is usable. > >> How is that different from putting ext on top of a raid0? > > Classic raid0 doesn't allow deleting/removing disks from a cluster. > >>> With ext2/3/4 I mount 2 disks/partitions into the first disk. If on= e >>> disk fails the contents of the 2 other disks is still readable, > >> There is nothing that prevents you from using this strategy with >> btrfs. > > How? > I've tried many installations of btrfs, sometimes 1 disk failed, and > then the data on all other disks was inaccessible. "With ext2/3/4 I mount 2 disks/partitions into the first disk. If one disk fails the contents of the 2 other disks is still readable," There's nothing stopping you from using 3 btrfs filesystems mounted in the same way as you would 3 ext4 filesystems. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" = in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html