From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-user+bounces-168346-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B95241384B4
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 23:14:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D430721C144;
	Wed, 11 Nov 2015 23:14:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-wm0-f50.google.com (mail-wm0-f50.google.com [74.125.82.50])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1EF621C126
	for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 23:14:36 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wmvv187 with SMTP id v187so7698567wmv.1
        for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 15:14:35 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=eu_ipp_pt.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
         :content-type;
        bh=/ATyQYDF/BNU+DAHEH1fLXo730XDlF0qoqy90F/bonU=;
        b=GiIFIkJZh249Z3/4bmZc4tURR0n9Ky1lJTJcW2nPTy111IgTYko4Zf+JZe0D2Mjm7q
         woDqTo3+QvJMK3jTfvMEoHqXKTIklwPtuGgW4lVLfIoany2PGMvRE5BXxH8Da2g/j5R2
         fSFrLUQNMPVJ80MION8pIU1fJlvxRqStDH4dPs7QaZt7BKXN4GPI6bWDbd7wUyVdAxJE
         ZFflkd10jlB5M0rm4uqg2xZvCA/5dfh4fo44N1tNA7F3k1wQfUDbCErdVfdNFgZGntZg
         gPWkb9IH9AUfxthSBckA8ZcyJlERKtLdNUFCq3xpOfVBhDPYO9PdFAXJJQkbAw6jmGkh
         AewQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
         :message-id:subject:to:content-type;
        bh=/ATyQYDF/BNU+DAHEH1fLXo730XDlF0qoqy90F/bonU=;
        b=T/bKwv190bsIkBVaAq8RMc7oy9OZKcWmj4hHc1fJqOHXGjl8xKx1Z2nbbOv0s1+lbl
         ZUCVBehtvPdZAGWlfYAJyhet8ktS6SjhvKw8DbXj03uu0KYqxtlZyhRW26egwfw3tbL0
         VI5s+34J76aNmL/BzwjBqetgkIYjPl8M8UiXJ2wiYkXcJPaEJFp5mkyz9iPo9RnCP5xd
         UYe3AKpkccDZWkZ729/fJM9L26pK7KoovvWxyp5AoweFw3cDv37gxJ2A4q1P4WPPxlJJ
         gJYr2dLBT0HPJWBzRt5O+S6IoDW5+5UDVkEXZE6ZOytEssOGfxRZf8qwr2w/rXiwbujn
         Zq3w==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm4j8r8apFoZ/mNqCd6wg19lh2U8bNXgY7LMFhHAkJoZojCAncFf5JspkE+umZb1L5uQpSH
X-Received: by 10.28.156.75 with SMTP id f72mr25891658wme.91.1447283675186;
 Wed, 11 Nov 2015 15:14:35 -0800 (PST)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.28.30.145 with HTTP; Wed, 11 Nov 2015 15:14:15 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <56437653.2080603@ramses-pyramidenbau.de>
References: <56437653.2080603@ramses-pyramidenbau.de>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Nuno_Magalh=C3=A3es?= <nunomagalhaes@eu.ipp.pt>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 23:14:15 +0000
Message-ID: <CADqA9uZ6fQ0f_3zWc5RcwNivEDzh+CBEuQgEj1x4kLaasHedxA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Fileserver with Raid + Crypto + BtrFS
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Archives-Salt: 5144a665-88df-4204-97ce-05d356a00710
X-Archives-Hash: 81e0bed72d6ce5e982bd6b7110aefbfa

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Ralf
<ralf+gentoo@ramses-pyramidenbau.de> wrote:
> So I'm
> thinking about to migrate to Btrfs.

Have you considered ZFS?
I currently have some disks with {fs}+LVM+RAID1 and others with a ZFS
mirror (no extra disks for ARC or anything), both approaches seem
manageable. To me btrfs still seems "not-ready-yet", but that's just
me.

Can't offer any real benchmarks, i'm just starting out, but the
correct comparison seems to be btrfs vs ZFS, not btrfs vs fs+LVM+RAID.

Cheers,
Nuno