From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C870F15815E for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2024 17:11:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 51831E2A81; Fri, 9 Feb 2024 17:11:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smarthost01c.ixn.mail.zen.net.uk (smarthost01c.ixn.mail.zen.net.uk [212.23.1.22]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C510EE2A78 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2024 17:11:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [82.69.80.10] (helo=cube.localnet) by smarthost01c.ixn.mail.zen.net.uk with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1rYUPK-004syQ-HQ for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 09 Feb 2024 17:11:26 +0000 From: Peter Humphrey To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Suggestions for backup scheme? Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2024 17:11:25 +0000 Message-ID: <6030440.lOV4Wx5bFT@cube> In-Reply-To: <7b7a8788-b425-450e-b8b6-7ab98c7892dc@youngman.org.uk> References: <4882577.GXAFRqVoOG@iris> <7b7a8788-b425-450e-b8b6-7ab98c7892dc@youngman.org.uk> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Originating-smarthost01c-IP: [82.69.80.10] Feedback-ID: 82.69.80.10 X-Archives-Salt: 87c1d4d9-46be-4d58-896f-5bb175ad2707 X-Archives-Hash: dc60d56112e49d6037f6e97bf7618157 On Friday, 9 February 2024 15:48:45 GMT Wols Lists wrote: > ... And I'm not worried about a double failure - yes it could happen, > but ... > > Given that my brother's ex-employer was quite happily running a raid-6 > with maybe petabytes of data, over a double disk failure (until an > employee went into the data centre and said "what are those red > lights"), I don't think my 20TB of raid-5 is much :-) [OT - anecdote] I used to work in power generation and transmission (CEGB, for those with long memories), in which every system was required to be fault tolerant - one fault at a time. As Wol says, that's fine until your one fault has appeared and not been noticed. Then another fault appears - and the reactor shuts down! Carpeting comes next... Oh, frabjous day! [/OT] -- Regards, Peter.