| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
RAID arrayRAID arrayPosted Mar 19, 2008 21:02 UTC (Wed) by ajross (subscriber, #4563)In reply to: RAID array by wtarreau Parent article: On the vger.kernel.org outage
That said, raid arrays that fail when plugging in a specific device are awfully suspect. Signal problems on the port should be a soft failure, not a hard one. That's the whole spending lots of money on server hardware. If it was OK for a drive to take down the system, they could have been running on a $900 box from Walmart. All file server boxes really need is a ton of RAM. Disk bandwidth needn't enter into it. Didn't I see a report a while back that kernel.org was, in fact, serving everything out of cache anyway? All of which, really, just goes down as evidence for my long-held opinion that hardware-level solutions for reliability never work. Reliability can only be achieved at the software level via full redundancy.
(Log in to post comments)
RAID array Posted Mar 20, 2008 17:31 UTC (Thu) by dmarti (subscriber, #11625) [Link] "Reliability can only be achieved at the software level." Instead of a mailing list, a Usenet-like discussion system on top of git?
RAID array Posted Mar 21, 2008 6:20 UTC (Fri) by njs (subscriber, #40338) [Link] Amusingly, the original vision for monotone actually had NNTP as the primary intended network transport.
|
|
||||||||||||