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 E9F171381FA for ; Sat, 17 May 2014 11:41:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B7238E0B55; Sat, 17 May 2014 11:41:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ve0-f171.google.com (mail-ve0-f171.google.com [209.85.128.171]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ACCCEE0B25 for ; Sat, 17 May 2014 11:41:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ve0-f171.google.com with SMTP id oz11so4388476veb.16 for ; Sat, 17 May 2014 04:41:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=M20jd5UdtsMi+6JmZGpOSh/RduB6RvNtpJZeRnOT6aI=; b=oUAbYkUwecQfaTUF9FNVE+MFeXpqB7FuiqRyTe6LBzhuidf5G4gTDC3lqwSHW1cQMe eCyMWbaAmyRZxyV/4XgMISfObJNtFprGbfuvb/CV+XWb6XBZfeI5icfot6T7IhvTZFA6 AwX6xfTq27NWEBgr5/oI0at8p63VW4UQG6rqTZM7Q7+Yurh+9wOCTMZwLWNhttkEQOAQ 4fLTyxU51Xum4oOHymjM8LfaOnuVyKvLHfAq9nfTxCvfcMqHa9TE6MQ6bbYHORq9FcHR KxGBN207fGOEYu5RghQBjrk3cb9Fs+vUE7aqqKJDFS6V7dVt5iD6catclO3Qka+kr7JS TbTg== 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 X-Received: by 10.58.220.161 with SMTP id px1mr19725346vec.13.1400326878694; Sat, 17 May 2014 04:41:18 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.30.227 with HTTP; Sat, 17 May 2014 04:41:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201405170853.12888.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> References: <20140506121832.678ae781@marcec> <5376A871.7010609@iinet.net.au> <5376D14B.9010306@iinet.net.au> <201405170853.12888.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 07:41:18 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: CaRAq680BPqc28f0SSD1uejdD7I Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] experience thus far From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: 64bb1afb-3e3b-4a2a-9f79-284c56c63fde X-Archives-Hash: 913bbe0a9c93b31e4d9e2c72295d5676 On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 3:53 AM, Mick wrote: > I am not clear on one thing: is the corruption that you show above *because* > of btrfs, or it would occur silently with any other fs, like e.g. ext4? That is something I'm curious about as well as I stumbled on this thread. I've been running btrfs on a 5 drive array set to raid1 for both data and metadata for several months now, and I've yet to see a single error in my weekly scrubs. This is on a system that is up 24x7, running mysql, mythtv, postfix, and a daily rsync backup - basically light disk activity at all times, and heavy activity moderately often. The only issue I've had with btrfs is ENOSPC when it manages to allocate all of its chunks (more of a problem on a smaller ssd running btrfs for /), and panics when I try to remove several snapshots at once. I'm not sure how easy it would be to test for silent corruption on another fs, unless you tried using ZFS instead, or used tripwire or some other integrity checker. Testing the drive itself would be straightforward if you didn't need to use it in any kind of production capacity - write patterns to it and try to read them back in a few days. Rich