Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In with Google

Poll

No poll attached to this discussion.

In order to better support our growing community we've set up a new more powerful forum.


The new forum is at: http://community.covecube.com


The new forum is running IP.Board and will be our primary forum from now on.


This forum is being retired, but will remain online indefinitely in order to preserve its contents. This forum is now read only.


Thank you,

DrivePool and parity data created on demand

edited March 2013 in DrivePool
Is this function planned for DrivePool? 
I know there are some alternatives like flexRAID in snapshot mode plus DrivePool strictly for pooling but it would be much nicer to run DrivePool only.
I think folder duplication is waste of drives capacity.
I would love to see this as a new function within DrivePool. I don't need real time pairing since all of my files are static and would assume parity should take a place overnight.

Comments

  • Resident Guru
    Not currently, though when I asked Alex about it he said - and I'm paraphrasing, not quoting - he has been thinking about the feature and whether it should be part of drivepool or a separate program, as there are pros/cons for duplicating vs parity depending on the user's requirements.

    I'm sure any comments on how DP users would like to see such an ability implemented would be read.
  • I would also like to see parity added to drivepool since many dp users use it to store movies duplication is a waste of expensive space since we can now create multiple pools. it would be great to be able to have 1 pool for movies protected by parity whilst having another pool for day to day stuff using duplication flexiraid does work but like many others I prefer to keep the use of different software to a min to avoid conflicts.

    When I asked Alex about this he was thinking about it and if he should try inter grate it into drivepool or create a seperate version of dp for parity I think intergration would be my preferd choice.

    If Alex does decide to do it I think I would also like to see if possible to add a hot spare which could be used by either a parity pool or the normal dupe pool in case if drive failure.

    I suppose we are getting into the realms of why not just use raid that does all of the above I have had a raid card go bust on me and its a very shit day when it does and I would much prefer to lose 1 whole drive of data under dp than a whole array any day
Sign In or Register to comment.