| 1 |
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Nuno Magalhães <nunomagalhaes@××××××.pt> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Another approach is ZFS with RAID-Z or similar. I don't know how/if |
| 4 |
> ZFS splits data among the drives, but i assume it's wise enough to do |
| 5 |
> so in a way similar to a RAID+LVM combo. |
| 6 |
>... |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> I don't know about btrfs, seems like it's still in a testing-phase so |
| 9 |
> i'm not touching it yet. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
My understanding is that both zfs and btrfs on linux are fairly |
| 12 |
experimental. The codebase for zfs is much more mature in general, |
| 13 |
though its integration on Linux is recent. The codebase for btrfs |
| 14 |
changes rapidly, with quite a few regressions. I've never |
| 15 |
irrecoverably lost data on btrfs, but it wouldn't be my first choice |
| 16 |
for a production environment unless I basically did my own QC on the |
| 17 |
kernel. However, all my important data is on btrfs nonetheless (with |
| 18 |
a full backup to ext4 daily right now). |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
Rich |
Archives