On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 5:11 PM Glen Slick via cctalk
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 1:42 PM Josh Dersch via cctalk
> wrote:
> >
> > I think I may have answered my own question here; looks like it's for a VAX
> > 8000 series:
> >
> > https://www.wikiwand.com/en/VAX_8000
> >
On 7/17/20 7:07 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
Yes, if you define it that way then clearly I agree. The thing is
that in most people's definition, "drive failure" means "the drive
is a door stop".
Ya I've had too many "but the drive isn't a brick ... how could it
be the failure" experiences to
On 7/17/2020 6:58 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
If I'm going to be dealing with that type of oddness, I'd rather do it
on my preferred OS of choice than something embedded that I don't have
much experience with.
On the other hand I never lost any data on my IBM DS4300 or 4700 SANs.
The
On 7/17/20 4:33 PM, Chris Zach via cctalk wrote:
Oh yeah. I remember having a DS4300 that had a failed drive and when we
tried to rebuild it corrupted the whole string. Call to IBM ensued where
they had us disable one controller, then the other controller was able
to rebuild the array, then we
Oh yeah. I remember having a DS4300 that had a failed drive and when we
tried to rebuild it corrupted the whole string. Call to IBM ensued where
they had us disable one controller, then the other controller was able
to rebuild the array, then we brought the first controller back in sync.
On 7/17/20 2:39 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
"too many drives failed at the same time"
IMHO, this encompases hard read errors. For what ever reason, the drive
was not able to priovide the data within a reasonable time period.
Be it physical drive failure, hard read error rate, or
On 7/17/20 2:42 PM, Paul Berger via cctalk wrote:
I had a disk that went over a SMART threshold that was part of a mdadm
software mirror and it posted a message every time I rebooted warning of
impending doom.
That sounds like the typical S.M.A.R.T. alert from the BIOS. Not
something from
On 2020-07-17 5:36 p.m., Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
On 7/17/20 2:30 PM, ben via cctalk wrote:
Does modern software even let you know if a drive is failing?
I'm not aware of any software RAID solution jumping up and proactively
notifying you that there's a problem /by/ /default/.
But
> On Jul 17, 2020, at 4:19 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On 7/17/20 12:58 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
>> What is "three drive parity"?
>
> A poor choice of words in a complex topic.
>
> How about "three drives worth of redundancy" Meaning that your data will
> still be
On 7/17/20 2:30 PM, ben via cctalk wrote:
Does modern software even let you know if a drive is failing?
I'm not aware of any software RAID solution jumping up and proactively
notifying you that there's a problem /by/ /default/.
But I think the same thing is largely true about hardware RAID
On 7/17/2020 2:19 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
On 7/17/20 12:58 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
What is "three drive parity"?
A poor choice of words in a complex topic.
How about "three drives worth of redundancy" Meaning that your data
will still be accessible if three drives
On 7/17/20 12:58 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
What is "three drive parity"?
A poor choice of words in a complex topic.
How about "three drives worth of redundancy" Meaning that your data
will still be accessible if three drives fail.
ZFS has three versions of ZRAID or RAID-Z.
-
> On Jul 17, 2020, at 2:54 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> ..
>> Interesting. Is there an official RAID level for three drive parity?
>
> I'm not aware of one. But my ignorance thereof does not preclude it from
> existing.
What is "three drive parity"? "Parity" is the
On 7/16/20 11:58 AM, Ali wrote:
Absolutely correct. Proof reading good ;)! It was RAID 1.
I'm guessing that the cosmic ray flipped the bit in transit to the
mailing list server. :-D
Interesting. Is there an official RAID level for three drive parity?
I'm not aware of one. But my
On 7/16/20 12:07 PM, Ali wrote:
MS LanMan was Microsoft's networking OS of choice before NT. The base
OS I believe was based on MS OS/2 1.31.
Hum.
I'm trying to discern if it was it's own independent OS, or if it was
more a package of a COTS OS (OS/2) and LAN Man package, like Back Office
/
On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 01:09:21PM -0700, Ali via cctalk wrote:
[Hardware RAID controllers]
>> There is no good use case for them in 2020, which is why they're all
>> suddenly quite cheap.
> Why do you say that? Not disagreeing per se but just wondering the reasoning
> behind it.
On the "no good
On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 06:12:34PM -0400, Chris Zach wrote:
> Anyone know the best way to get files off an AT 7300/3B1 computer? This
> one has a lot of Perq stuff in a directory as well as hilarious things you
> can do with RP06 disk platters (ah, when we were young...)
>
You may have finished
17 matches
Mail list logo
