Hi! I wonder wouldn't it be efficient to select ALGORITHM_?type?_ASYMMETRIC ...

Hi! I wonder wouldn't it be efficient to select ALGORITHM_?type?_ASYMMETRIC ...

[Igor Podlesny]

... depending on, for e. g., chunk number? My assumption is that this
can address FS meta-data issue, can't it?

(I'm not subscribed to the list, so please CC:.)

-- 
End of message. Next message?

Re: Hi! I wonder wouldn't it be efficient to select ALGORITHM_?type?_ASYMMETRIC ...

[Igor Podlesny]

	Hi!

	This letter is re-post primarily for Neil Brown, because no one on
the list had answered that message and Neil's blog says: "If you think
it really needs my attention, Cc me, but still send it to
linux-raid.".

2008/11/6 Igor Podlesny <for.poige+linux@gmail.com>:
> ... depending on, for e. g., chunk number? My assumption is that this
> can address FS meta-data issue, can't it?
>
> (I'm not subscribed to the list, so please CC:.)
>

-- 
End of message. Next message?

Re: Hi! I wonder wouldn't it be efficient to select ALGORITHM_?type?_ASYMMETRIC ...

[NeilBrown]

On Wed, November 12, 2008 5:35 am, Igor Podlesny wrote:
> 	Hi!
>
> 	This letter is re-post primarily for Neil Brown, because no one on
> the list had answered that message and Neil's blog says: "If you think
> it really needs my attention, Cc me, but still send it to
> linux-raid.".

:-)

>
> 2008/11/6 Igor Podlesny <for.poige+linux@gmail.com>:
>> ... depending on, for e. g., chunk number? My assumption is that this
>> can address FS meta-data issue, can't it?
>>

I think the problem here is that your question is too brief so it is
not at all clear how to answer it.

Exactly how are you suggesting that the layout be dependant on chunk number,
what is the "FS meta-data issue", and why do you assume that the one
can be addressed by the other.

If you can explain what you are thinking, it would be easier to comment
on whether the thoughts are good or not.



>> (I'm not subscribed to the list, so please CC:.)

Always.


NeilBrown