On Sun, May 08, 2011 at 05:25:24PM -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote: > Luca Berra wrote: > >On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 09:17:52AM +0200, Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote: > >>I would like linux MD raid10 functionality to be part of the Linux MD > >>RAID1 module, and be called raid1. This is in accordance with the > >then we need rename the current raid1 functionality to 'mirror'. in > >order to avoid further confusion. > >besides, current raid10 does not support resizing, so the feature > >should be added before ditching 'mirror' > > > > The current md RAID1 does exactly what RAID1 is supposed to do. I changed my mind a little. I think we should follow SNIA wrt. RAID1 - all that SNIA would say is RAID1 we also should be able to do as RAID1 - that would include raid10-offset which directly was implemented in the Linux kernel because of the SNIA RAID1 specification. It should also include raid10-far in so far it is a raid1 type - say a raid10,f2 with only 2 disks. Then we should keep the raid10 stuff. > The md RAID10 is a very specific, and unique approach that has > similarities to, but is distinct from, RAID1+0, RAID0+1, RAID5, and RAID6. Yes, Linux MD raid10 is a very distinct type. We should talk with SNIA to get it recognized. > What say we leave the names alone. Just beause one person is confused is > no reason to further confuse things. The confusion is not just one person. The confusion is unbelievable common, and has proven to be very hard to eliminate. If we align with the SNIA standard, and further get the standard to align with us, then we should have a chance in say 5 years to have reduced the confusion considerably. Best regards Keld -- 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
