4 ms·
That you could have dialed up the redundancy for metadata to 3x or even 4x copies being stored, and just because a block got bitrot doesn't mean other blocks fa
by namibj 5y ago
That you could have dialed up the redundancy for metadata to 3x or even 4x copies being stored, and just because a block got bitrot doesn't mean other blocks fail to read.
I know no one would use Btrfs raid5/6 in production, but that's because no one wanted to enough to get the required development done.
If it was just file blocks that got corrupted, there would be just very minor damage in total and a scrub that logs all damaged blocks typically proceeds at sequential read speeds from what I've observed in the past.
- chungy 5y agoZFS already stores three logical copies of all metadata, regardless of copies parameter or vdev redundancy. The failures LTT experienced went way beyond what ZFS, or btrfs, could repair. They made severe errors in judgment when setting up the system and failing to monitor and administer it. No system will ever protect against this. Not ZFS. Not btrfs.