All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chris Murphy <lists@colorremedies.com>
To: Hugo Mills <hugo@carfax.org.uk>,
	"linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>,
	Austin Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: RAID system with adaption to changed number of disks
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 17:58:22 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJCQCtSY2Y5AsW2FC5FGP3x3Vaz6Y10=EbAE-0FKFQAqg0oGkg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161011160601.GI7683@carfax.org.uk>

https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Status
Scrub + RAID56 Unstable will verify but not repair

This doesn't seem quite accurate. It does repair the vast majority of
the time. On scrub though, there's maybe a 1 in 3 or 1 in 4 chance bad
data strip results in a.) fixed up data strip from parity b.) wrong
recomputation of replacement parity c.) good parity is overwritten
with bad, silently, d.) if parity reconstruction is needed in the
future e.g. device or sector failure, it results in EIO, a kind of
data loss.

Bad bug. For sure.

But consider the identical scenario with md or LVM raid5, or any
conventional hardware raid5. A scrub check simply reports a mismatch.
It's unknown whether data or parity is bad, so the bad data strip is
propagated upward to user space without error. On a scrub repair, the
data strip is assumed to be good, and good parity is overwritten with
bad.

So while I agree in total that Btrfs raid56 isn't mature or tested
enough to consider it production ready, I think that's because of the
UNKNOWN causes for problems we've seen with raid56. Not the parity
scrub bug which - yeah NOT good, not least of which is the data
integrity guarantees Btrfs is purported to make are substantially
negated by this bug. I think the bark is worse than the bite. It is
not the bark we'd like Btrfs to have though, for sure.


-- 
Chris Murphy

  reply	other threads:[~2016-10-11 23:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-11 15:14 RAID system with adaption to changed number of disks Philip Louis Moetteli
2016-10-11 16:06 ` Hugo Mills
2016-10-11 23:58   ` Chris Murphy [this message]
2016-10-12  1:32     ` Qu Wenruo
2016-10-12  4:37       ` Zygo Blaxell
2016-10-12  5:48         ` Qu Wenruo
2016-10-12 17:19           ` Zygo Blaxell
2016-10-12 19:55             ` Adam Borowski
2016-10-12 21:10               ` Zygo Blaxell
2016-10-13  3:40                 ` Adam Borowski
2016-10-12 20:41             ` Chris Murphy
2016-10-13  0:35             ` Qu Wenruo
2016-10-13 21:03               ` Zygo Blaxell
2016-10-14  1:24                 ` Qu Wenruo
2016-10-14  7:16                   ` Chris Murphy
2016-10-14 19:55                     ` Zygo Blaxell
2016-10-14 21:19                       ` Duncan
2016-10-14 21:38                       ` Chris Murphy
2016-10-14 22:30                         ` Chris Murphy
2016-10-15  3:19                           ` Zygo Blaxell
2016-10-12  7:02         ` Anand Jain
2016-10-12  7:25     ` Roman Mamedov
2016-10-12 17:31       ` Zygo Blaxell
2016-10-12 19:19         ` Zygo Blaxell
2016-10-12 19:33           ` Roman Mamedov
2016-10-12 20:33             ` Zygo Blaxell
2016-10-11 16:37 ` Austin S. Hemmelgarn
2016-10-11 17:16 ` Tomasz Kusmierz
2016-10-11 17:29 ` ronnie sahlberg
2016-10-12  1:33 ` Dan Mons

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAJCQCtSY2Y5AsW2FC5FGP3x3Vaz6Y10=EbAE-0FKFQAqg0oGkg@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=lists@colorremedies.com \
    --cc=ahferroin7@gmail.com \
    --cc=hugo@carfax.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.