pgman wrote: > Jim Seymour wrote: > > Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > [snip] > > > > > > We do need to point out that you're only as reliable as your last > > > backup. I'm not sure exactly where to say this. > > [snip] > > > > > > > Hmph. Backups are for mitigation against a catastrophic failure > > destroying or corrupting main storage. And even then: Subtle errors > > can induce data corruption that may go un-noticed until it's too late. > > (I.e.: The last correct backups have been over-written, retired, so > > old they've become unreadable, so old the data's no longer useful, > > etc.) > > > > My position is that your data is only as reliable as your hardware, > > period. Use cheap (usually PC, sorry) hardware and, well... I wonder > > how many people are aware of the fact that the cheaper PCs don't even > > have parity memory anymore? Then there are the issues with IDE > > drives. (Don't recall those, exactly - don't use 'em.) > > There is a basic misconception that all PC hardware is created equal --- > that hard drives, mother boards, and RAM are all the same because they > are all PC-compatible. Compatible != Similar Quality. > > Not sure where we would document this. :-( > > Running BSD, I have always had to buy server-class hardware for my home > machines, and I never regretted it nor had a problem.
Should I add an FAQ discussing hardware selection and the importance of reliable hardware? -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
