<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On Jan 9, 2014, at 11:18 PM, Paul Cuzner <<a href="mailto:pcuzner@redhat.com">pcuzner@redhat.com</a>> wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite"><div style="font-family: 'lucida console', sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; "><div><br></div><div>2)however, for the current implementations out there bit rot is still a risk and we need to do something. By utilsing the new changlog framework with the checksum process, we can enable bit-rot detection on the more standard and more widely accepted LVM/XFS deployments.</div></div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div style="font-family: 'lucida console', sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; "><div><br></div><div>I guess we need one eye on the now, and another on the near-future!<br></div></div></blockquote></div><br><div>Sure, it makes sense. The network itself can induce silent data corruption, so there's still a reason for checksumming at the GlusterFS level even on Btrfs. But maybe on Btrfs, GlusterFS only needs to exchange checksum to account for network induced SDC, and doesn't need to store the checksums.</div><div><br></div><div>Chris Murphy</div></body></html>