Fortunately unRAID and similar solutions are getting popularity so I don't need to look for RAID on btrfs anymore.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Btrfs Will Finally "Strongly Discourage" You When Creating RAID5 / RAID6 Arrays
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by zxy_thf View PostFortunately unRAID and similar solutions are getting popularity so I don't need to look for RAID on btrfs anymore.
Comment
-
So it would be relatively pointless to post the obligatory "ZFS RaidZ1/2/3 work really well". But I will say that I've been extremely happy with it. And they came out with RaidZ3 specifically because of the risk of disk failures during rebuilds with very large disks.
No matter what FS/Vol management you are using for peak performance stripes and/or stripes-of-mirrors are the way to go.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by CommunityMember View PostThe hyperscalers (and their ilk) generally do not try to repair a broken server/filesystem, they blow the instance away and reinstall/rebuild from scratch
Comment
-
Originally posted by horizonbrave View Post
UNRAID doesn't seem to try to fix many problems (no bitrot prevention) and give priority to data integrity on a professional level. It seems a pretty GUI for containers and a well designed flexibility in terms of data pool expansion
Personally I would use SnapRAID instead.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by F.Ultra View Post
If only more motherboards would have more than one m.2 slots, that is the only reason why I run BTRFS in single mode on my home machine. That said there is some bug in either btrfs, udev or the initramfs script in atleast Ubuntu 20.04 because on new servers that I've set up with BTRFS in RAID1 on the boot drive they very often end up in the initramfs console during boot due to not being able to find a root device.
I've recently got 3 M.2 to PCIe cards (2 with passive cooling) but haven't used them yet on the only desktop (SFF, only 1 PCIe slots...).
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Zan Lynx View PostDo you mean the btrfs RAID-5 code? It isn't "insecure." It's possibly data lossy and buggy.
Comment
Comment