A bit more detailed overview of a btrfs update that I find interesting, see the pull request for the rest.
New block group profiles RAID1C3 and RAID1C4
There are two new block group profiles enhancing capabilities of the RAID1
types with more copies than 2. Brief overview of the profiles is in the table
below, for table with all profiles see manual page of
The way all the RAID1 types work is that there are 2 / 3 / 4 exact copies over all available devices. The terminology is different from linux MD RAID, that can do any number of copies. We decided not to do that in btrfs to keep the implementation simple. Another point for simplicity is from the users’ perspective. That RAID1C3 provides 3 copies is clear from the type. Even after adding a new device and not doing balance, the guarantees about redundancy still hold. Newly written data will use the new device together with 2 devices from the original set.
Compare that with a hypothetical RAID1CN, on a filesystem with M devices (N <= M). When the filesystem starts with 2 devices, equivalent to RAID1, adding a new one will have mixed redundancy guarantees after writing more data. Old data with RAID1, new with RAID1C3 – but all accounted under RAID1CN profile. A full re-balance would be required to make it a reliable 3-copy RAID1. Add another device, going to RAID1C4, same problem with more data to shuffle around.
The allocation policy would depend on number of devices, making it hard for the
user to know the redundancy level. This is already the case for
RAID0/RAID5/RAID6. For the striped profile RAID0 it’s not much of a problem,
there’s no redundancy. For the parity profiles it’s been a known problem and
new balance filter
stripe has been added to support fine grained selection of
Speaking about RAID6, there’s the elephant in the room, trying to cover write hole. Lack of a resiliency against 2 device damage has been bothering all of us because of the known write hole problem in the RAID6 implementation. How this is going to be addressed is for another post, but for now, the newly added RAID1C3 profile is a reasonable substitute for RAID6.
How to use it
On a freshly created filesystem it’s simple:
# mkfs.btrfs -d raid1c3 -m raid1c4 /dev/sd[abcd]
The command combines both new profiles for sake of demonstration, you should always consider the expected use and required guarantees and choose the appropriate profiles.
Changing the profile later on an existing filesystem works as usual, you can use:
# btrfs balance start -mconvert=raid1c3 /mnt/path
Provided there are enough devices and enough space to do the conversion, this will go through all metadadata block groups and after it finishes, all of them will be of the of the desired type.
The new block groups are not understood by old kernels and can’t be mounted,
not even in the read-only mode. To prevent that a new incompatibility bit is
raid1c34. Its presence on a device can be checked by
btrfs inspect-internal dump-super in the
incompat_flags. On a running
system the incompat features are exported in sysfs,
There is no demand for RAID1C5 at the moment (I asked more than once). The space utilization is low already, the RAID1C4 survives 3 dead devices so IMHO this is enough for most users. Extending resilience to more devices should perhaps take a different route.
With more copies there’s potential for parallelization of reads from multiple devices. Up to now this is not optimal, there’s a decision logic that’s semi-random based on process ID of the btrfs worker threads or process submitting the IO. Better load balancing policy is a work in progress and could appear in 5.7 at the earliest (because 5.6 development is now in fixes-only mode).
The history of the patchset is a bit bumpy. There was enough motivation and requests for the functionality, so I started the analysis what needs to be done. Several cleanups were necessary to unify code and to make it easily extendable for more copies while using the same mirroring code. In the end change a few constants and be done.
Following with testing, I tried simple mkfs and conversions, that worked well. Then scrub, overwrite some blocks and let the auto-repair do the work. No hiccups. The remaining and important part was the device replace, as the expected use case was to substitute RAID6, replacing a missing or damaged disk. I wrote the test script, replace 1 missing, replace 2 missing. And it did not work. While the filesystem was mounted, everything seemed OK. Unmount, check again and the devices were still missing. Not cool, right.
Due to lack of time before the upcoming merge window (a code freeze before next development cycle), I had to declare it not ready and put it aside. This was in late 2018. For a highly requested feature this was not an easy decision. Should it be something less important, the development cycle between rc1 and final release provides enough time to fix things up. But due to the maintainer role with its demands I was not confident that I could find enough time to debug and fix the remaining problem. Also nobody offered help to continue the work, but that’s how it goes.
At the late 2019 I had some spare time and looked at the pending work again. Enhanced the test script with more debugging messages and more checks. The code worked well, the test script was subtly broken. Oh well, what a blunder. That cost a year, but on the other hand releasing a highly requested feature that lacks an important part was not an appealing option.
The patchset was added to 5.5 development queue at about the last time before freeze, final 5.5 release happened a week ago.