linux-kernel - Re: [ANNOUNCE] Ramback: faster than a speeding bullet

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <m31w6a8dxb.fsf@maximus.localdomain>
Date:	Mon, 17 Mar 2008 00:08:48 +0100
From:	Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>
To:	Daniel Phillips <phillips@...nq.net>
Cc:	David Newall <davidn@...idnewall.com>, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Ramback: faster than a speeding bullet

Daniel Phillips <phillips@...nq.net> writes:

>> It could, in a bit different location maybe, but it isn't a substitute
>> for ordered writes.
>
> How so?

Not sure if I understand the question correctly but obviously a pair
(mirror) of servers running "dangerous" ramback would survive a crash
of one machine and we could practically eliminate the probability of
both (all) machines crashing simultaneously. However, there are
cheaper ways to achieve similar performance and even better
reliability - including those battery-backed (RAI)Disk controllers.
-- 
Krzysztof Halasa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/