Re: Raid10 layout

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 02:04:13PM +0000, Robin Hill wrote:
> My understanding is that the layout should be (using your ordering):
> 
> A C B D
> 1 2 3 4
> 5 6 7 8
> . . . .
> . . . .
> 4 1 2 3
> 8 5 6 7
> . . . .
> . . . .
> 
> Allowing the loss of A & B, or C & D.
> 
> Is this not what you're seeing on-disk?

It's ok .

My error was in the  compute of the offset , i starting from physical device size but i have 
not include the bitmap .
So when i starting from array device size , it's ok .

-- 
     ____________________________________________________________
    / Erwan MAS                                                 /\
   | mailto:erwan@xxxxxxxxxx                                   |_/
___|________________________________________________________   |
\___________________________________________________________\__/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux