NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
btrfs, RAID5 and performances
Now that I have a RAID5 system running on a 104 box. I have the following comment/questions. As far as I can tell, btrfs is not handling the RAID 5 process, but instead operates on top of a RAID5 M...
The only reason why your design relies so heavily on MD is because you use it to manage the RAID configuration on top of it.
This is fine if you only want to look at the storage as a RAID pool first, and a btrfs store second.
The end result is that you only ever present a single volume to btrfs, negating all the useful multiple volume stuff that btrfs provides.
The btrfs only model just requires presenting the physical volumes to brtfs. No MD, no software RAID. Any argument that starts with "We need MD to be able to manage..." totally misses the point.
If I want storage expansion then I can manage that through btrfs. What I can't do with this model is the vertical expansion of the existing physical volumes.
As long as this is documented and the user is aware it would not be an issue.
I can already manually configure my 104 to provide a physical volume btrfs store in no time flat. I could possibly provision all my btrfs subvolumes manually as well, but it would be a chore.
You already have all the management code to handle the btrfs store. Once a btrfs store is created the management is identical.
All you need is a management layer to create the btrfs store without MD and RAID underneath it. It would just be an extra configuration layer: X-RAID, FlexRAID, and JBOD btrfs.
Just my 10c worth.
This is fine if you only want to look at the storage as a RAID pool first, and a btrfs store second.
The end result is that you only ever present a single volume to btrfs, negating all the useful multiple volume stuff that btrfs provides.
The btrfs only model just requires presenting the physical volumes to brtfs. No MD, no software RAID. Any argument that starts with "We need MD to be able to manage..." totally misses the point.
If I want storage expansion then I can manage that through btrfs. What I can't do with this model is the vertical expansion of the existing physical volumes.
As long as this is documented and the user is aware it would not be an issue.
I can already manually configure my 104 to provide a physical volume btrfs store in no time flat. I could possibly provision all my btrfs subvolumes manually as well, but it would be a chore.
You already have all the management code to handle the btrfs store. Once a btrfs store is created the management is identical.
All you need is a management layer to create the btrfs store without MD and RAID underneath it. It would just be an extra configuration layer: X-RAID, FlexRAID, and JBOD btrfs.
Just my 10c worth.
NETGEAR Academy
Boost your skills with the Netgear Academy - Get trained, certified and stay ahead with the latest Netgear technology!
Join Us!
