lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Aug]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: raid is dangerous but that's secret (was Re: [patch] ext2/3: document conditions when reliable operation is possible)
    On Sun, 30 Aug 2009, Pavel Machek wrote:

    >>> From: Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>
    >>>
    >> To use your ABS brakes analogy, just becase it's not safe to rely on
    >> ABS brakes if the "check brakes" light is on, that doesn't justify
    >> writing something alarmist which claims that ABS brakes don't work
    >> 100% of the time, don't use ABS brakes, they're broken!!!!
    >
    > If it only was this simple. We don't have 'check brakes' (aka
    > 'journalling ineffective') warning light. If we had that, I would not
    > have problem.
    >
    > It is rather that your ABS brakes are ineffective if 'check engine'
    > (RAID degraded) is lit. And yes, running with 'check engine' for
    > extended periods may be bad idea, but I know people that do
    > that... and I still hope their brakes work (and believe they should
    > have won suit for damages should their ABS brakes fail).

    the 'RAID degraded' warning says that _anything_ you put on that block
    device is at risk. it doesn't matter if you are using a filesystem with a
    journal, one without, or using the raw device directly.

    David Lang


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-08-30 14:59    [W:2.634 / U:0.008 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site