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 A4F2B1381FA for ; Wed, 14 May 2014 09:26:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CEE28E0B29; Wed, 14 May 2014 09:26:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.digimed.co.uk (82-69-83-178.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk [82.69.83.178]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9101E0B19 for ; Wed, 14 May 2014 09:26:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from digimed.co.uk (shooty.digimed.co.uk [192.168.1.8]) by mail.digimed.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 0FB902314B for ; Wed, 14 May 2014 10:26:45 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 10:26:39 +0100 From: Neil Bothwick To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] btrfs conversion: first impressions Message-ID: <20140514102639.745d26ee@digimed.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <53732F4B.3080302@xunil.at> References: <20140506121832.678ae781@marcec> <5369688C.1040708@iinet.net.au> <20140507015126.5b57fb88@marcec> <536B712E.3040009@iinet.net.au> <536BC974.9090200@xunil.at> <536D339D.9000506@xunil.at> <536E0A01.4070803@xunil.at> <536F6EA2.6030506@xunil.at> <536FA2A4.4040205@xunil.at> <536FEA92.1080502@xunil.at> <20140512163049.4f605ff0@marcec> <537112CB.7050408@xunil.at> <53729DE4.3090908@xunil.at> <20140514000228.546a90f2@hactar.digimed.co.uk> <5372A61D.9060406@xunil.at> <20140514013910.37678e36@digimed.co.uk> <537322E6.9040907@xunil.at> <20140514094247.7753ea59@digimed.co.uk> <53732F4B.3080302@xunil.at> Organization: Digital Media Production X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.3-184-g39672a (GTK+ 2.24.23; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-GPG-Fingerprint: 7260 0F33 97EC 2F1E 7667 FE37 BA6E 1A97 4375 1903 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Sig_/D5OTiX/BfN2wcSVI2yhiJl+"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: f5578325-b33c-410c-b6ff-e0eab2ad68e7 X-Archives-Hash: 583c60ff7edbd7539867473491f2497e --Sig_/D5OTiX/BfN2wcSVI2yhiJl+ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 14 May 2014 10:54:35 +0200, Stefan G. Weichinger wrote: > > No, because each element of the RAID is encrypted separately, so > > btrfs can still use the good one to repair the bad one. If you were > > to create an mdadm array, put dm-crypt on that and then btrfs on > > top, which is more efficient because it encrypts each byte only > > once, then you would lose the check and repair facilities. =20 >=20 > What RAID? I think of a laptop with only one SSD inside. You mean the > duplicated metadata in this case? Ah right. I've got RAID n the brain because I'm currently resizing the partitions for a ZFS RAID so I can try out btrfs... and it's all your fault for starting this thread and piquing my interest in btrfs again! --=20 Neil Bothwick Secret hacker rule #11: hackers read manuals. --Sig_/D5OTiX/BfN2wcSVI2yhiJl+ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlNzNs8ACgkQum4al0N1GQNlkwCgmT4IVRawBisqpO4/wwLOM2wG UMMAn1Zf+ll9ntawMxaoitEKQa8TIfwq =H9SK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/D5OTiX/BfN2wcSVI2yhiJl+--