On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 06:46:15PM -0600, Stan Hoeppner wrote:

On 1/13/2014 5:38 PM, keld@keldix.com wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 09:27:51AM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:

...

quoted

quoted

So this change:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Non-standard_RAID_levels&diff=501908270&oldid=501604733

was wrong.

Well, it was me doing the wikipedia edit. The edit was done based on information from Neil that this was actually 
the layout. Then later we found out that it really was not, but it should be; and then Neil implemented
the better layout.  Maybe it is not called "f2", I look forward to be informed what the actual name 
will be. 

I think the name should be "f2" as it is a "far" layout, with 2 copies, and it really should be
the default for "far" with 2 copies, as the redundancy is much better than the old layout.
Keeping the name would mean that  we would not need to make and spread documentation on this,
so that people following existing documentation would automatically get the better implementation.
There is no need that new raid instances of "far" should get the old layout, except for
backwards compatibility. 

The problem here is that you're creating the Wikipedia page as if it
*is* source reference material.  I.e. you're including "original work,
your original work.  This is a violation of the Wikipedia rules of
editing.  And this kind of situation is exactly why those rules exist.

I am only referencing material available other places.

The layout tables you are including need to exist in a free to duplicate
reference document, and should be copied verbatim from said document.
They should not be created from scratch simply based on information in
an email exchange on a mailing list, just as web forums are not
considered a valid reference source.

I only described things that was already described.

best regards
keld