On Tuesday, 6 March 2018 8:14:08 PM AEDT Craig Sanders via luv-main wrote:
With ZFS you only add them one RAID set at a time and after adding that RAID set can't be changed. You can't just add a disk at a time as you do with BTRFS.
If you're using mirrored pairs, that's no problem - you'll always be adding or upgrading a pair of drives at a time. e.g. to go from RAID-1 with a single mirrored pair to RAID-10 with two mirrored pairs. or to add a third or fourth or fifth ... mirrored pair of drives.
If you have any sort of enterprise use then you will have matched pairs. For home use it's pretty common to just use whatever you have available. If you have a home BTRFS RAID-1 setup you can just add a new disk at any time and after a balance operation the RAID-1 capacity will have increased by half the size of that disk. I have a spare 4TB disk sitting around for when I need an extra 2TB of usable space in my home server.
Last time I checked BTRFS RAID-5 and RAID-6 wasn't reliable IMHO.
Still isn't.
And I have my doubts about whether its raid-1 or raid-10 modes are entirely reliable either...i'm still seeing occasional reports of catastrophic data loss with btrfs that can't easily be dismissed as user error.
There are some situations where a system with memory errors will give moderate corruption on Ext3/4 but massive data loss on BTRFS. ECC is a good thing. Backups are good too.
RE: CDDL vs GPL
I don't think it's legally dubious. Oracle know exactly what they are doing, if Oracle thought it was bad they would have let them know.
"dubious" was the wrong word. "prohibited" is accurate. It's only "legally dubious" because, as you say, it's very unlikely that Oracle or anyone else with standing would sue.
Fair point, I hadn't seen that one before. Oh well my clients will be safe, their position is that they trust Canonical and will keep using it until/unless advised otherwise. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/