From: david-sarah Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 20:30:26 +0000 (+0000) Subject: docs/configuration.rst: clarify statement about lack of redundancy when shares.happy... X-Git-Tag: allmydata-tahoe-1.10a1~67 X-Git-Url: https://git.rkrishnan.org/uri?a=commitdiff_plain;h=9a6fb895459b3b9341367187b2f8aeb1f7a1dc66;p=tahoe-lafs%2Ftahoe-lafs.git docs/configuration.rst: clarify statement about lack of redundancy when shares.happy <= k. fixes #1793 --- diff --git a/docs/configuration.rst b/docs/configuration.rst index 31962d47..20a0fbfc 100644 --- a/docs/configuration.rst +++ b/docs/configuration.rst @@ -346,8 +346,13 @@ Client Configuration guarantee the availability of the uploaded file. This value should not be larger than the number of servers on your grid. - A value of ``shares.happy`` <= ``k`` is allowed, but does not provide any - redundancy if some servers fail or lose shares. + A value of ``shares.happy`` <= ``k`` is allowed, but this is not + guaranteed to provide any redundancy if some servers fail or lose shares. + It may still provide redundancy in practice if ``N`` is greater than + the number of connected servers, because in that case there will typically + be more than one share on at least some storage nodes. However, since a + successful upload only guarantees that at least ``shares.happy`` shares + have been stored, the worst case is still that there is no redundancy. (Mutable files use a different share placement algorithm that does not currently consider this parameter.)