2 ms·
Have they fixed raid 5 yet? Last time I checked, they said "we don't care" and declared it stable.
by nubinetwork 4y ago
Have they fixed raid 5 yet? Last time I checked, they said "we don't care" and declared it stable.
- rhn_mk1 4y agoHome distributions are very much not the right place to look for raid 5. That's small server territory.
- nubinetwork 4y agoNot everyone can afford a dedicated NAS/file server.
- rhn_mk1 4y agoNo one designing defaults for a home distro will tune it for the server use case by default, so raid 5 considerations are totally irrelevant to OP's question.
- nubinetwork 4y agoI hate to break it to you, but distros have been supporting lvm and mdadm for decades. The only thing(s) that define a "server" distro are support contracts and ego. Ubuntu server is no different than standard Ubuntu when both use and can run the exact same packages.
- rhn_mk1 4y agoI think we can both see that the question has been about defaults, which differ between Ubuntu server and standard.
- yjftsjthsd-h 4y agoWhat do defaults have to do with it? Like, sure, if I use a desktop spin of Ubuntu on a NAS I expect performance to be worse, but I don't expect it to lose my data. That's not a bad default, that's bad code.
- rhn_mk1 4y agoOP's question: "Ask HN: Why isn't BTRFS the default FS in home-oriented Linux distributions?"
- chungy 4y agoMeanwhile, my desktop, running raidz2 (RAID6 equiv): works great.
- xorcist 4y agoIt's not exactly a showstopper for btrfs, so that makes sense. You can still use with with plain old MD raid.