lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Apr]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
FromDenis Vlasenko <>
SubjectRe: Are linux-fs's drive-fault-tolerant by concept?
DateMon, 21 Apr 2003 11:37:00 +0300
On 19 April 2003 21:41, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> Hi,
>   Besides the problem that most drive manufacturers now seem to use
> cheese as the data storage surface, I think there are some other
> problems:
>
>  1) I don't trust drive firmware.
>        2) I don't think all drives are set to remap sectors by default.
>        3) I don't believe that all drivers recover neatly from a drive error.
>        4) It is OK saying return the drive and get a new one - but many of
>           us can't do this in a commercial environment where the contents of
>                 the drive are confidential - leading to stacks of dead drives
>                 (often many inside their now short warranty periods).

And sadly,

   2) I don't trust Linux (driver + fs)
      will react adequately to disk errors.

Drive failures aren't that frequent, and relevant code paths
doomed to stay rarely tested (unless we put 0.00001% 'faked'
failures there ;)
--
vda
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:34    [from the cache]
©2003-2008