Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Data loss was the real...ahem...killer (Score 1) 317

I never saw that running on decent hardware with battery backed RAID units. I saw significant dataloss the one time I tried XFS (all of - ooh, a month ago) and had to nuke the entire server and start over.

We run ext4 rather than reiserfs mostly now, but it served us well for very many years.

Mind you - I did try reiser4 on my laptop for a bit back in 2004, and I had dataloss there. Never had dataloss with reiser3 though, except the really early versions. Even then it was a lot better than ext2, which was the alternative at the time.

Comment "Bad news" (Score 5, Insightful) 178

That's what happens when you adopt early, you get earlier revisions of stuff.

The alternative would be to never upgrade for fear of making the early adopters sad. Of course there has to be a balance, but most non-assholes accept that this is how things work.

On the plus side, they actually HAVE their Pi now, and have had the use of it already. If they hadn't bought it (collectively), there would be no Pi.

Mmm, Pi.

Comment Re:All on consumer grade drives..... (Score 1) 273

Yeah, and I remember well when Berkeley Uni on their shiny expensive-disks SAN had their whole email system go up in flames for over a week due to a single failed drive and the extra IO hit to recover. When the same thing happens to me with the cheap SATA crap we use, I just move all the masters from that machine to other machines and let it rebuild. No loss of service, minimal impact spread over a large pile of users.

Apart from a really bad batch of 300Gb 10kRPM drives a couple of years ago, it's been very easy. Roughly one failure per month. Systems designed for rapid failover. No worries.

Even in the horrible case where I lost a whole machine and had to rebuild from scratch, only about 5% of users were affected by noticable slowdowns because they were on the source drives for the re-replication, and had to compete for IO. I could have reduced the impact on them by slowing the replication, but that's longer without full redundancy.

(this is all RAID1 as well)

There's more than one way to do it. I care about our users' data plenty, which is why it's on 6 separate live spindles PLUS backup.

Slashdot Top Deals

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary saftey deserve neither liberty not saftey." -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759