From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (unknown [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14DEB1381FA for ; Wed, 28 May 2014 15:28:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6DCD7E0897; Wed, 28 May 2014 15:28:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.sgi.com [192.48.180.65]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEDD0E087E for ; Wed, 28 May 2014 15:28:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from conejo.engr.sgi.com (conejo.engr.sgi.com [150.166.130.27]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74916304051 for ; Wed, 28 May 2014 08:28:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sgi.com (conejo.engr.sgi.com [150.166.130.27]) by conejo.engr.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 035136784DE2 for ; Wed, 28 May 2014 08:28:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 08:28:23 -0700 From: Bob Sanders To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Soliciting new RAID ideas Message-ID: <20140528152822.GB13493@sgi.com> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org References: <20140527223938.GA3701@sgi.com> <20140528015114.3634f6b4@marcec> <20140528152658.GA13493@sgi.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140528152658.GA13493@sgi.com> Organization: SGI, Fremont, California, U.S.A. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) X-Archives-Salt: 5aa1b24c-f2f7-4acd-b9be-14926db03ac3 X-Archives-Hash: c2fb35cda0bcd2e11466a9ba2bd16140 Bob Sanders, mused, then expounded: > > Marc Joliet, mused, then expounded: > > Am Tue, 27 May 2014 15:39:38 -0700 > > schrieb Bob Sanders : > > > > While I am far from a filesystem/storage expert (I see myself as a mere user), > > the cited threads lead me to believe that this is most likely an > > overhyped/misunderstood class of errors (e.g., posts [1] and [2]), so I would > > suggest reading them in their entirety. > > > > [0] http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/31832 > > [1] http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/31871 > > [2] http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/31877 > > [3] http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/31821 > > > > FWIW - here's the FreeNAS ZFS ECC discussion on what happens with a bad > memory bit and no ECC memory: > > http://forums.freenas.org/index.php?threads/ecc-vs-non-ecc-ram-and-zfs.15449/ > > > Thanks Mark! Interesting discussion on btrfs. > Apologies - that should have been - Thanks Marc! > Bob > > > HTH > > -- > > Marc Joliet > > -- > > "People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we > > don't" - Bjarne Stroustrup > > > > -- > - > > -- -