Re: RAID is a matter of availability, not data security
Richard Gooch (rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca)
Tue, 24 Aug 1999 12:39:24 -0600
Hubert Tonneau writes:
> Having a perfeclty stable kernel that requires to umount the file system (so
> stop the real service) each time a hardware failure appends is just
> hypocritical: users don't care at all if the problem is OS related or
> hardware related; they care of availability.
> RAID IS A MATTER OF PROVIDING MORE AVAILABILITY FROM STANDARD HARDWARE,
> and it requires hot repair, so if you want to keep the old code in the kernel,
> call it toy raid, or call the new one real raid, but put the 0.90 code in the
> 2.2 standard kernel, eventualy with EXPERIMENTAL in front of it,
> or never pretend that 2.2 is a stable kernel: it's just an OS designers
> masturbation.
> Or would it mean that enabling SUPPORT_RECONSTRUCTION in the old code is
> considered safer than the new code and is maintained more actively ?
Is there some reason that you are so rude and hostile? Or are you
actively seeking to be killfiled?
Regards,
Richard....
Old: rgooch@atnf.csiro.au
Current: rgooch@ras.ucalgary.ca
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/