[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110714165516.GA15253@agk-dp.fab.redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 17:55:16 +0100
From: Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>, Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@...hat.com>,
Nico Schottelius <nico-lkml-20110623@...ottelius.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
Alasdair G Kergon <agk@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Mis-Design of Btrfs?
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 04:38:36PM +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
> It might make sense for a device to be able to report what the maximum
> 'N' supported is... that might make stacked raid easier to manage...
I'll just say that any solution ought to be stackable.
This means understanding both that the number of data access routes may
vary as you move through the stack, and that this number may depend on
the offset within the device.
Alasdair
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists