From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf0-f43.google.com ([209.85.215.43]:36616 "EHLO mail-lf0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751454AbdG2T3s (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 Jul 2017 15:29:48 -0400 Received: by mail-lf0-f43.google.com with SMTP id o85so42121535lff.3 for ; Sat, 29 Jul 2017 12:29:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20170501170641.GG3516@merlins.org> <20170707163834.GA6083@merlins.org> <20170709043417.GE6704@merlins.org> <21425367.VGcO8ck7Vu@merkaba> From: Imran Geriskovan Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2017 21:29:46 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: 4.11.6 / more corruption / root 15455 has a root item with a more recent gen (33682) compared to the found root node (0) To: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 7/9/17, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote: > I have however just upgraded to new ssds then wiped and setup the old > ones as another backup set, so everything is on brand new filesystems on > fast ssds, no possibility of old undetected corruption suddenly > triggering problems. > > Also, all my btrfs are raid1 or dup for checksummed redundancy Do you have any experience/advice/comment regarding dup data on ssds?