Talk:Project ideas

From btrfs Wiki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Added suggestion of RAID from Drives of Differing Capacities)
Line 16: Line 16:
  
 
--[[User:Cg|Cg]] 13:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 
--[[User:Cg|Cg]] 13:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 
  
 
If we are going to have a fs for massive allocation; administration and maintenance will be an issue. I would like to see an active '''manager''' system that can be '''clustered''' across PCs. Ideally split into two dynamically changing and balanced workloads between '''guest time''' and '''host time'''.
 
If we are going to have a fs for massive allocation; administration and maintenance will be an issue. I would like to see an active '''manager''' system that can be '''clustered''' across PCs. Ideally split into two dynamically changing and balanced workloads between '''guest time''' and '''host time'''.
Line 29: Line 28:
  
 
--[[User:Relic|Relic]] 17:37, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 
--[[User:Relic|Relic]] 17:37, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 +
 +
 +
== RAID from Drives of Differing Capacities ==
 +
 +
It would be awesome to see intelligent handling of storage devices with various capacities akin to [http://drobo.com/ Drobo's] Beyondraid. The ability to expand a raid with newer larger & cheaper drives as needed would be very useful for power users, small-medium business users and (with a friendly enough gui) average users.
 +
 +
The Beyondraid system uses the total redundant space as a pool in which it stores data from multiple virtual volumes. These volumes are a predetermined size usually 16TB, well beyond the physically installed capacity, users expand the physical capacity as needed for their data. Redundancy can be dynamically switched between 1 or 2 drives. The system is plug and play, self healing, data-aware, fully automated and near infinitely expandable.
 +
 +
<pre>
 +
Drobo's Beyondraid from [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-standard_RAID_levels#Drobo_BeyondRAID Wikipedia Non standard raid levels - Beyondraid]
 +
 +
          Drives
 +
| 100&nbsp;GB | 200&nbsp;GB | 400&nbsp;GB | 500&nbsp;GB |
 +
 +
                            ----------
 +
                            |  x    | unusable space (100&nbsp;GB)
 +
                            ----------
 +
                  -------------------
 +
                  |  A1  |  A1  | RAID 1 set (2× 100&nbsp;GB)
 +
                  -------------------
 +
                  -------------------
 +
                  |  B1  |  B1  | RAID 1 set (2× 100&nbsp;GB)
 +
                  -------------------
 +
          ----------------------------
 +
          |  C1  |  C2  |  Cp  | RAID 5 array (3× 100&nbsp;GB)
 +
          ----------------------------
 +
-------------------------------------
 +
|  D1  |  D2  |  D3  |  Dp  | RAID 5 array (4× 100&nbsp;GB)
 +
-------------------------------------
 +
 +
1200Gb Drive Capacity
 +
Beyondraid: 700Gb Usable
 +
RAID 5: 300Gb Usable
 +
</pre>
 +
 +
'''Differentiators for btrfs:'''
 +
 +
Adding drives to a "dynamic raid (pool)" would be a mkfs option and could be integrated into a gui application
 +
 +
The "dynamic raid" system would be able to work with any block device and intelligently deal with partitions from the same drive treating them as a large non-continuous drive so redundancy information is not kept on the same drive. This will allow users to use any capacity they have no matter where it's located.
 +
 +
What Beyondraid doesn't allow is for users to use the entire first drive if it is not paired with a second drive. Allowing this would offer an easy path into redundancy and expansion. New installs create a dynamic raid on one drive (unless more are available) Fill up the first drive; add a second drive, get redundancy; add a third or more get extra space. Perhaps the first drive of a "dynamic raid" could be created from an existing btrfs partition.
 +
 +
--[[User:Ddfitzy|Ddfitzy]] 11:33, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:33, 1 August 2010

- What I'm missing is any kind of encryption support.
  It would be nice to include encryption support into btrfs (as long as the on-disk file fromat isn't finished),
  so one can easily handle (upcoming) multiple device (raidB/B2) targets with one key.
  For now I would have to setup LUKS below btrfs, which is very suboptimal for multiple device configurations (raid)

°raidB/B2 is a synonym for btrfs enhanced raid5/6 ;)

André 07:55, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


It would be nice to see somewhat intelligent or flexible handling of devices of different sizes with RAID 5/6.

For example, if I had two 250GB drives and two 500GB drives and made a RAID5 of them, the two 250GB devices could be first "combined" to make one 500GB volume and then make the RAID5 on top of the three 500GB volumes. The resulting RAID5 volume would then have ~1000GB of usable space (with distributed parity).

In theory, I could make similar setup by combining the two 250GB drives with md RAID0 first, but this seems unoptimal.

--Cg 13:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

If we are going to have a fs for massive allocation; administration and maintenance will be an issue. I would like to see an active manager system that can be clustered across PCs. Ideally split into two dynamically changing and balanced workloads between guest time and host time.

I envision host time being used for automated fs maintenace tasks that will use upto 90% activity but leave a 10% window for incoming guest work. The guest time will be for live file read/write from the user/guest system(s). As the guest workload increases the Host workload will progressively shut down dynamically reducing to 0% and allowing the guest time to rise to 90% or more on the fly. As guest load drops the host load can rise back to full.

Defragmentation and filesystem integrity checking should be left to this manager, releasing this burden from the admin but allowing the drives to still be utilised at full speed when reqired.

Perhaps an aggression config option can be made available by this clustered manager system and allow host work disk access to be moderated from a lazy 10% to a rampant 90% with aggression states or levels inbetween. If this would be deemed more prudent for drive life expectancy. Then the admin can can alter this value during the day or night (should change be required for some reason) and worry about little else.

Anyway, such a manager may also allow improvements in drive speed by seperating out essential disk write aspects from less essential disk write aspects.

--Relic 17:37, 10 March 2009 (UTC)


RAID from Drives of Differing Capacities

It would be awesome to see intelligent handling of storage devices with various capacities akin to Drobo's Beyondraid. The ability to expand a raid with newer larger & cheaper drives as needed would be very useful for power users, small-medium business users and (with a friendly enough gui) average users.

The Beyondraid system uses the total redundant space as a pool in which it stores data from multiple virtual volumes. These volumes are a predetermined size usually 16TB, well beyond the physically installed capacity, users expand the physical capacity as needed for their data. Redundancy can be dynamically switched between 1 or 2 drives. The system is plug and play, self healing, data-aware, fully automated and near infinitely expandable.

Drobo's Beyondraid from [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-standard_RAID_levels#Drobo_BeyondRAID Wikipedia Non standard raid levels - Beyondraid]

           Drives
 | 100 GB | 200 GB | 400 GB | 500 GB |

                            ----------
                            |   x    | unusable space (100 GB)
                            ----------
                   -------------------
                   |   A1   |   A1   | RAID 1 set (2× 100 GB)
                   -------------------
                   -------------------
                   |   B1   |   B1   | RAID 1 set (2× 100 GB)
                   -------------------
          ----------------------------
          |   C1   |   C2   |   Cp   | RAID 5 array (3× 100 GB)
          ----------------------------
 -------------------------------------
 |   D1   |   D2   |   D3   |   Dp   | RAID 5 array (4× 100 GB)
 -------------------------------------

1200Gb Drive Capacity 
Beyondraid: 700Gb Usable
RAID 5: 300Gb Usable

Differentiators for btrfs:

Adding drives to a "dynamic raid (pool)" would be a mkfs option and could be integrated into a gui application

The "dynamic raid" system would be able to work with any block device and intelligently deal with partitions from the same drive treating them as a large non-continuous drive so redundancy information is not kept on the same drive. This will allow users to use any capacity they have no matter where it's located.

What Beyondraid doesn't allow is for users to use the entire first drive if it is not paired with a second drive. Allowing this would offer an easy path into redundancy and expansion. New installs create a dynamic raid on one drive (unless more are available) Fill up the first drive; add a second drive, get redundancy; add a third or more get extra space. Perhaps the first drive of a "dynamic raid" could be created from an existing btrfs partition.

--Ddfitzy 11:33, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Personal tools