All of your emails: Reply-To: [email protected] With Apple Mail when I hit Reply, I get your email address only. When I use Reply All, I get yours and the list and anyone else put in the cc list. I never email people on lists directly myself, I always start with Reply and if that only goes to the individual, I hit reply all.
So you're welcome to figure out why you're getting double copies, the problem is not on my end. Chris Murphy On Mar 9, 2011, at 2:00 PM, objectwerks inc wrote: > Can you stop sending me double copies of every mail please Chris? Do you > know what REPLY-TO means in the headers? > > > On Mar 9, 2011, at 1:56 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > >> Chad, I am aware of the magnitude of the problem *IF* corruption occurs in >> RAID 5. That is not even remotely relevant with a conversation about the >> probability of such corruption. >> >> There appear to be two competing claims here: >> >> 1. RAID 5 itself is well known for having silent data corruption and should >> not be used. >> >> 2. Apple sold, until very recently a Mac OS X based, hardware RAID 5 >> solution, supposedly honoring a "do no evil, cause not harm" philosophy. >> >> RAID 5 is not a new thing. Silent data corruption is not a new thing. I >> won't buy an argument suggesting Apple just figured this out recently and >> that's one of the reasons why they killed the Xserve RAID. >> >> Chris Murphy >> >> On Mar 9, 2011, at 1:51 PM, objectwerks inc wrote: >> >>> >>> On Mar 9, 2011, at 1:46 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mar 9, 2011, at 1:35 PM, objectwerks inc wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> The integrity of the data with files after any issues such as these may >>>>>>> be suspect, especially if the fileystem was on a RAID5 which is very >>>>>>> well known for silent data corruption. This is why RAID5 should not be >>>>>>> used. >>>>>> >>>>>> OK that's possibly a whole separate thread for qualifying such a >>>>>> statement. Apple has a supported product that uses RAID 5. I have >>>>>> clients with them and they've lost drives, and no data, and no data >>>>>> corruption. And an even larger sample size exists if filesystems other >>>>>> than jhfs+ are considered. RAID 5/6 are common with ext3, ext4, XFS and >>>>>> other file systems without anyone suggesting RAID 5 in particular is >>>>>> known for itself increasing the incidence of silent data corruption. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> There is a reason why it is called silent data corruption. They may not >>>>> know they have it. It happens all the time and with HW raid 5 you may >>>>> not even know it for a long time. >>>>> >>>>> This is the whole reason why ZFS was made. >>>> >>>> ZFS was not made for combating this claim of RAID 5 specific silent data >>>> corruption, but rather silent data corruption in general. >>> >>> And the difference is? You corrupt one disk in a RAID 5 array and the >>> whole array is corrupted. >>> >>>> >>>> RAID 5 employs parity. RAID 1 does not, nor do conventional non-arrayed >>>> jhfs+ volumes. While RAID parity is not as sophisticated at ZFS >>>> checksumming, it is certainly better than nothing. So there is some error >>>> detection and correction possible, so I'm not understanding how RAID 5 is >>>> "well known for silent data corruption" and should not be used. I think >>>> this is a rather remarkable claim. >>>> >>>> >>>> Chris Murphy >>> >>> >>> If you have one disk that has silent data corruption (and parity may not >>> help you at all as you calculate your new parity on the corrupted data) you >>> compound it with RAID 5. >>> >>> http://www.raidinc.com/pdf/Silent%20Data%20Corruption%20Whitepaper.pdf >>> >>> >>> http://boink.superatomic.com/2009/04/25/the-raid-5-write-hole/ >>> >>> >>> http://www.google.com/#hl=en&sugexp=ldymls&xhr=t&q=raid+5+silent+data+corruption&cp=24&qe=cmFpZCA1IHNpbGVudCBjb3JydXB0aW9u&qesig=0VyEUZb1ePVXqTxPyJd8vg&pkc=AFgZ2tkTDI1HqM7fc6R1egXasC-1CNF3wT4BG5rzsZmDlr4IGBRuaMW3LWOqaaHzeI1IQlVZ2T5WTE3o3LlGRR6gLiYOy2lsHA&pf=p&sclient=psy&site=&source=hp&aq=0b&aqi=&aql=&oq=raid+5+silent+corruption&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.&fp=ef34c9a9ed856910 >>> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> MacOSX-admin mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/macosx-admin > _______________________________________________ MacOSX-admin mailing list [email protected] http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/macosx-admin
