|
NSA325 v2 - post install questions January 02, 2026 01:34AM |
Registered: 3 years ago Posts: 13 |
cata@debian:~$ cat /etc/debian_version 12.12 cata@debian:~$ uname -a Linux debian 6.17.7-kirkwood-tld-1 #1 Mon Nov 3 16:38:22 PST 2025 armv5tel GNU/Linux cata@debian:~$ lsblk NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINTS sda 8:0 0 2.7T 0 disk |-sda1 8:1 0 487M 0 part `-sda2 8:2 0 2.7T 0 part `-md0 9:0 0 2.7T 0 raid1 sdb 8:16 0 2.7T 0 disk |-sdb1 8:17 0 487M 0 part `-sdb2 8:18 0 2.7T 0 part `-md0 9:0 0 2.7T 0 raid1 sdc 8:32 0 119.2G 0 disk `-sdc1 8:33 0 119.2G 0 part /
|
Re: NSA325 v2 - post install questions January 02, 2026 02:24AM |
Registered: 4 years ago Posts: 93 |
Nope. Except that you can create a somewhat bigger array, by reclaiming the 2 487MB partitions. ButQuote
tmcatalin
Is it any technical reason to create from zero new partitions instead of using existing ones?
I can't say anything about performance, but it does make sense to change. In case of btrfs the filesystem itself does the raid, instead of some under-laying mechanism. When a 'classic' raid1 array finds an unreadable/damaged sector, it will drop the disk, and you'll have to rebuild the array. In case of btrfs, the filesystem will use the data from the other disk to repair it. That apart from other advantages of btrfs like checksumming and snapshots.Quote
Did anyone using btrfs on these boxes see improved performances over mdadm? Does make sense to change from mdadm?
|
Re: NSA325 v2 - post install questions January 02, 2026 03:43AM |
Admin Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 20,027 |
|
Re: NSA325 v2 - post install questions January 02, 2026 08:04AM |
Registered: 3 years ago Posts: 13 |