<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:creativeCommons="http://backend.userland.com/creativeCommonsRssModule"	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: btrfs RAID1 benchmark on Dell E4200 with 128GB SSD</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.csamuel.org/2009/01/04/btrfs-raid1-benchmark-on-dell-e4200-with-128gb-ssd/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.csamuel.org/2009/01/04/btrfs-raid1-benchmark-on-dell-e4200-with-128gb-ssd</link>
	<description>The Thoughts and Feelings of a Melbourne Person</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 20:34:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: rektide</title>
		<link>http://www.csamuel.org/2009/01/04/btrfs-raid1-benchmark-on-dell-e4200-with-128gb-ssd/comment-page-1#comment-54046</link>
		<dc:creator>rektide</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2009 20:59:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.csamuel.org/?p=1509#comment-54046</guid>
		<description>Chris Mason pointed out on the mailing list that RAIDing multiple partitions will often not physically separate data being written to a SSD, and thus may not provide redundancy.  Would it be too much trouble to ask for you to re-run without RAID1?  I&#039;d also like to see XFS added for good measure.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Chris Mason pointed out on the mailing list that RAIDing multiple partitions will often not physically separate data being written to a SSD, and thus may not provide redundancy.  Would it be too much trouble to ask for you to re-run without RAID1?  I&#8217;d also like to see XFS added for good measure.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Samuel</title>
		<link>http://www.csamuel.org/2009/01/04/btrfs-raid1-benchmark-on-dell-e4200-with-128gb-ssd/comment-page-1#comment-53447</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Samuel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 03:00:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.csamuel.org/?p=1509#comment-53447</guid>
		<description>Yup, except it&#039;s now in the mainline kernel, which ZFS isn&#039;t.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yup, except it&#8217;s now in the mainline kernel, which ZFS isn&#8217;t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: alecm</title>
		<link>http://www.csamuel.org/2009/01/04/btrfs-raid1-benchmark-on-dell-e4200-with-128gb-ssd/comment-page-1#comment-53437</link>
		<dc:creator>alecm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Jan 2009 14:48:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.csamuel.org/?p=1509#comment-53437</guid>
		<description>&gt;Whilst the raw numbers are nowhere near as good you have to remember that this is doing checksumming of all the data and mirroring it across the two partitions I created for it and, if it finds a problem with the data, will try and recover using the data on the other partition. It’s also still in development!

What, like ZFS? :-P</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt;Whilst the raw numbers are nowhere near as good you have to remember that this is doing checksumming of all the data and mirroring it across the two partitions I created for it and, if it finds a problem with the data, will try and recover using the data on the other partition. It’s also still in development!</p>
<p>What, like ZFS? <img src='http://www.csamuel.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_razz.gif' alt=':-P' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
