savannah.gnu.org status
savannah.gnu.org status
Posted Jun 2, 2009 5:04 UTC (Tue) by dkk (guest, #50184)Parent article: savannah.gnu.org status
couldn't they just use one of those for the recovery?
Posted Jun 2, 2009 7:14 UTC (Tue)
by madhatter (subscriber, #4665)
[Link]
it's likely that the mirrors were also then sync'ed from the buggy RAID, and contain beautiful copies of the same crap data that's on the master. poor guys.
Posted Jun 2, 2009 7:17 UTC (Tue)
by Kit (guest, #55925)
[Link] (4 responses)
Posted Jun 2, 2009 9:26 UTC (Tue)
by zdzichu (subscriber, #17118)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Jun 2, 2009 10:04 UTC (Tue)
by rodgerd (guest, #58896)
[Link]
Posted Jun 2, 2009 11:56 UTC (Tue)
by niner (subscriber, #26151)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Jun 2, 2009 13:25 UTC (Tue)
by skvidal (guest, #3094)
[Link]
12-months to 2 years of one-month granularity backups <- tape
much profit
Posted Jun 2, 2009 20:09 UTC (Tue)
by man_ls (guest, #15091)
[Link]
savannah.gnu.org status
savannah.gnu.org status
savannah.gnu.org status
Or perhaps not.
savannah.gnu.org status
savannah.gnu.org status
as no hardware or filesystem is completely secure from such failures.
There are bugs everywhere.
savannah.gnu.org status
2 months of 1-day granularity backups <- tape
1 week of twice-daily backups <- disk
Mirrors and backups
couldn't they just use one of those for the recovery?
Just for files released by projects, which is what is mirrored. For the rest (database, websites, source code repositories) the mirrors have no information at all.