Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2005 21:45:52 -0500 From: David Scheidt <dmschei@attglobal.net> To: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: the value of a journal filesystem? Message-ID: <42043360.7040207@attglobal.net> In-Reply-To: <20050204192511.GA84359@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <20050204192511.GA84359@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Steve Kargl wrote: > I'm not sure if this is a ext2fs, ext3fs, or reiserfs, but > the 2nd paragraph is somewhat ominious. The notice does > statement whether the damaged filesystems are on other > disks or on disks in other machines (ie. nfs mounted). > I'd suggest that it points out the value of a good, tested, known to work recovery plan, that people actually know how to use. A machine going up in smoke shouldn't require an outage longer than the time it takes to replace the hardware, install an os, and restore from the backup media. Having to muck around trying to figure out how to get stuff off tape is no fun. Having to do it while the boss is screaming at you is less fun. Backup is easy. Backup is usually done well enough (if it's done at all, but only idiots don't). Recovery is much harder, much less likely to have been tested properly, much less likely to be documented outside the head of the guy who sort of though about it, and much less likely to be practiced. David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42043360.7040207>