sybarite - Slashdot User

Why RAID 5 Stops Working In 2009 803

Posted by kdawson on Tuesday October 21, 2008 @07:03PM from the back-'em-up-rawhide dept.

Lally Singh recommends a ZDNet piece predicting the imminent demise of RAID 5, noting that increasing storage and non-decreasing probability of disk failure will collide in a year or so. This reader adds, "Apparently, RAID 6 isn't far behind. I'll keep the ZFS plug short. Go ZFS. There, that was it." "Disk drive capacities double every 18-24 months. We have 1 TB drives now, and in 2009 we'll have 2 TB drives. With a 7-drive RAID 5 disk failure, you'll have 6 remaining 2 TB drives. As the RAID controller is busily reading through those 6 disks to reconstruct the data from the failed drive, it is almost certain it will see an [unrecoverable read error]. So the read fails ... The message 'we can't read this RAID volume' travels up the chain of command until an error message is presented on the screen. 12 TB of your carefully protected — you thought! — data is gone. Oh, you didn't back it up to tape? Bummer!"

Comment Exchange Active Sync Support (Score 1) 436

by sybarite on Friday September 21, 2007 @05:11PM (#20703305) Attached to: What Do You Want In iPhone 2.0?

I am hoping for Exchange Activesync support. I have several clients who will switch from Windows Mobile-based phones to the iPhone in droves if this were available.

Comment Conspiracy? No, just Yahoo User Interface library (Score 1) 1

by merlyn on Sunday September 16, 2007 @10:45AM (#20625421) Attached to: Slashdot Yahoo Conspiracy

See http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/ - a great javascript/css/widget lib with far better support, cross-browser compatibility, and breadth than things like prototype.js will ever get.

IE The Great Microsoft Blunder? 643

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Tuesday April 25, 2006 @03:38PM from the not-a-shining-example-of-engineering dept.

JordanL writes "Hot on the heels of the beta rollouts of IE 7, comes an editorial from John Dvorak declaring IE the biggest mistake Microsoft has ever made. From the article: 'All the work that has to go into keeping the browser afloat is time that could have been better spent on making Vista work as first advertised [...] If you were to put together a comprehensive profit-and-loss statement for IE, there would be a zero in the profits column and billions in the losses column--billions.'"

Journal Journal: Slashdot moderation abuse. 1

Journal by Samuel Duncan on Thursday February 05, 2004 @11:49AM

After posting a few controversial comments to slashdot my karma went from good down to terrible within 2 hours. So I can't post here for a while.
This supports my opinion that privacy advocates and Java users are immature and incapable of a civilized discussions.

Comment "generics" (Score -1, Interesting) 602

by Samuel Duncan on Thursday February 05, 2004 @08:53AM (#8188196) Attached to: Java SDK 1.5 'Tiger' Beta Finally Released

While some people always propagate the use of generics/templates, I'm strictly set up against it.
While you get at first sight nice stuff like reusability etc. there are several reasons for avioding generics like an STD:

The type checking is much weaker thus introducing new potential holes for error to slip through.
You must make some assumptions about the used classes however verifying the correctness of these assumptions in nearly impossible.
The reusabilty "argument" is rubbish: that's what we have already OOP for. And when you now claim performance problems due to heavy stack/virtual methods use: that's an issue of the processor design not of the programming language. When you think that running serious software on system compatible to 30 year old rubbish is cool, then you must accept the performance of 30 year old waste in the same turn.
The above mentioned problems create new security holes. That's why the use of generics/templates in strictly forbidden in e.g. the banking sector.
Due to turing completeness of most template/generics systems the compiler is slowed down to 30 percent performance. More evil is that templates push the grammars into the Chomsky-0 type making secure (=100%) correctness checking impossible.
In old languages like Lisps the use of generics is usually strongly discouraged to users unless they are ultra-gurus due to the bad experiences. It's not clear why this should be different for Java or C++.

Slashdot Top Deals