From: Alex Tomas Subject: Re: [RFC] store RAID stride in superblock Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 12:33:25 +0400 Message-ID: <46457BD5.8040301@clusterfs.com> References: <20070512020248.GQ6375@schatzie.adilger.int> <1178957506.20145.41.camel@eric-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-ext4 To: Eric Return-path: Received: from mail.rialcom.ru ([80.71.245.247]:58259 "EHLO mail.rialcom.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754877AbXELIds (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 May 2007 04:33:48 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1178957506.20145.41.camel@eric-laptop> Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org Eric wrote: > The concept is really tempting. RAID is good, and not asking the user > for information that the system can find out for itself is good too. > > In the unlikely event that the RAID stride were to change, I think the > autodetect-each-time method would be superior to the store-in-superblock > method. Doubly so if the code to detect MD and LVM stride is lean and > clean. true, but in some cases (hardware raid, SAN, etc) there is no easy way to learn that other than asking user. thanks, Alex