[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090331221053.74354735@the-village.bc.nu>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 22:10:53 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@...hat.com>,
"Andreas T.Auer" <andreas.t.auer_lkml_73537@...us.ath.cx>,
Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, Mark Lord <lkml@....ca>,
Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>,
Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Rees <drees76@...il.com>, Jesper Krogh <jesper@...gh.cc>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.29
> percentage. For many setups, the other corruption issues (drive failure)
> are not just more common, but generally more disastrous anyway. So why
> would a person like that worry about the (rare) power failure?
How about the far more regular crash case ? We may be pretty reliable but
we are hardly indestructible especially on random boxes with funky BIOSes
or low grade hardware builds.
For the generic sane low end server/high end desktop build with at least
two drive software RAID the hardware failure for data loss case is
pretty rare. Crashes yes, having to reboot to recover from a RAID failure
sure but data loss far less so
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists