Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 05:05:05 +0100 From: "boyd, rounin" <boyd@insultant.net> To: "William Josephson" <jkw@eecs.harvard.edu>, <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Unfortunate dynamic linking for everything Message-ID: <0a5901c3b0ad$cfb85220$b9844051@insultant.net> References: <2147483647.1069240727@[192.168.42.6]><20031120095214.GA68334@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org><050d01c3afa8$1dfb97a0$b9844051@insultant.net><156539179.20031121001033@andric.com><061f01c3afbd$4692a040$b9844051@insultant.net><3FBD788A.4070809@mindspring.com><20031121025952.GA85809@saboteur.dek.spc.org> <20031121202713.GA4060@mero.morphisms.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
From: "William Josephson" <jkw@eecs.harvard.edu> > People at Berkeley (and elsewhere) have done user studies to try to > quantify this sort of thing. It is pretty clear that with modern > hardware, most failures are due to human error. That's not to say > that hardware and software faults aren't real problems, too, but it > is more common that someone, say, pulls the wrong drive from the > RAID-5 array, resulting in an unnecessary double disk fault. that means your raid 5 is bust. i've seen raid 5 fail and it just picks another disk in the 'free' pool like nothing has happened. a study? it's bleeding obvious.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0a5901c3b0ad$cfb85220$b9844051>