Date: 07 Jan 2003 17:21:48 -0600 From: Kirk Strauser <kirk@strauser.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: security vulnerability in dump Message-ID: <87isx0tuk3.fsf@pooh.honeypot.net> In-Reply-To: <20030107233202.Y83991@slave.east.ath.cx> References: <200301072030.h07KUOBT005310@screech.weirdnoise.com> <20030107233202.Y83991@slave.east.ath.cx>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 2003-01-07T22:50:08Z, Andrew Prewett <andrew@kronos.HomeUnix.com> writes: > No, "umgekehrt", ideally / should be on a separate drive and /home, /var, > /usr on another drive(s). I mean, I wouldn't put my company database, > fileserver, etc. on a machine with only one drive. So, my wording was > maybe a little hard in the previous post - english is not my first > language. I administer quite a few webservers with exactly that setup. Why? Because at no more than 1-2 hits per second sustained, that single ATA-100 HD is nowhere near I/O bound. On the other hand, no machine I have control over goes without backups, down to my wife's little iMac, and including the terraservers with large mirrored RAID setups. Regardless of how many redundant copies of a file I have on the same machine, there ain't no RAID that can cope gracefully with a fire or tornado. *All* machines are dumped to offsite tapes, period. -- Kirk Strauser In Googlis non est, ergo non est. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?87isx0tuk3.fsf>