Re: [patch] ext2/3: document conditions when reliable operation ispossible

[Ric Wheeler]

On 08/25/2009 10:58 PM, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 09:15:00PM -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote:
>    
> > I agree with the whole write up outside of the above - degraded RAID
> > does meet this requirement unless you have a second (or third, counting
> > the split write) failure during the rebuild.
> >      
> The argument is that if the degraded RAID array is running in this
> state for a long time, and the power fails while the software RAID is
> in the middle of writing out a stripe, such that the stripe isn't
> completely written out, we could lose all of the data in that stripe.
>
> In other words, a power failure in the middle of writing out a stripe
> in a degraded RAID array counts as a second failure.
>    
> To me, this isn't a particularly interesting or newsworthy point,
> since a competent system administrator who cares about his data and/or
> his hardware will (a) have a UPS, and (b) be running with a hot spare
> and/or will imediately replace a failed drive in a RAID array.
>
>         	    	       	       	 	      - Ted
>    

I agree that this is not an interesting (or likely) scenario, certainly 
when compared to the much more frequent failures that RAID will protect 
against which is why I object to the document as Pavel suggested. It 
will steer people away from using RAID and directly increase their 
chances of losing their data if they use just a single disk.

Ric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/