[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090826025849.GF32712@mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 22:58:49 -0400
From: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
To: Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@...hat.com>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Florian Weimer <fweimer@....de>,
Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-v-b@....de>,
Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, mtk.manpages@...il.com,
rdunlap@...otime.net, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, corbet@....net
Subject: Re: [patch] ext2/3: document conditions when reliable operation is
possible
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 09:15:00PM -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote:
>
> I agree with the whole write up outside of the above - degraded RAID
> does meet this requirement unless you have a second (or third, counting
> the split write) failure during the rebuild.
The argument is that if the degraded RAID array is running in this
state for a long time, and the power fails while the software RAID is
in the middle of writing out a stripe, such that the stripe isn't
completely written out, we could lose all of the data in that stripe.
In other words, a power failure in the middle of writing out a stripe
in a degraded RAID array counts as a second failure.
To me, this isn't a particularly interesting or newsworthy point,
since a competent system administrator who cares about his data and/or
his hardware will (a) have a UPS, and (b) be running with a hot spare
and/or will imediately replace a failed drive in a RAID array.
- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists