Conversation
Notices
-
@quad @angristan raid-z has much better recovery characteristics than raid-5. Also, the tools overall are much nicer. If you dont need raid-5/z, you can use the standard Linux stuff.
-
@quad @angristan
checksum?
-
@quad @angristan
at that point, ought to just run btrfs itself
except the like raid5 bugz thing
except then zfs is basically the same thing
-
@quad @angristan
dunno, been on btrfs "raid1" for a long while now, but for a proper nas, in a magical future of having more than $30 at a time, would just do bsd. mdraid was annoying enough on its own without everything
-
@quad @angristan
yeh, suppose so, but like for such different filesystems would be more likely here to just use a different (set of) disk(s)
could be different trying to run a hosting company or something, but
-
@quad @angristan
yeh, i get where you're coming from. to me, though, it seems a bit overly grained, like running a separate os on every core of a multicore system, like it makes sense to me for a filesystem to span multiple disks, and it seems like raid was only made after the fact as a patch-job to handle an un-prepared-for usecase