Re: RAID 10 far and offset on-disk layouts

[keld@keldix.com]

On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 06:46:15PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 1/13/2014 5:38 PM, keld@keldix.com wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 09:27:51AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> ...
> >> So this change:
> >>
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Non-standard_RAID_levels&diff=501908270&oldid=501604733
> >>
> >> was wrong.
> > 
> > Well, it was me doing the wikipedia edit. The edit was done based on information from Neil that this was actually 
> > the layout. Then later we found out that it really was not, but it should be; and then Neil implemented
> > the better layout.  Maybe it is not called "f2", I look forward to be informed what the actual name 
> > will be. 
> > 
> > I think the name should be "f2" as it is a "far" layout, with 2 copies, and it really should be
> > the default for "far" with 2 copies, as the redundancy is much better than the old layout.
> > Keeping the name would mean that  we would not need to make and spread documentation on this,
> > so that people following existing documentation would automatically get the better implementation.
> > There is no need that new raid instances of "far" should get the old layout, except for
> > backwards compatibility. 
> 
> The problem here is that you're creating the Wikipedia page as if it
> *is* source reference material.  I.e. you're including "original work,
> your original work.  This is a violation of the Wikipedia rules of
> editing.  And this kind of situation is exactly why those rules exist.


I am only referencing material available other places.

> The layout tables you are including need to exist in a free to duplicate
> reference document, and should be copied verbatim from said document.
> They should not be created from scratch simply based on information in
> an email exchange on a mailing list, just as web forums are not
> considered a valid reference source.

I only described things that was already described.

best regards
keld