On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 11:30 -0400, Jonah H. Harris wrote: > On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 11:24 AM, Greg Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > SMART doesn't detect 100% of drive failures in advance, but you'd be silly > > to setup a database system where you don't get to take advantage of the > > ~50% it does catch before you lose any data. > > Can't argue with that one.
SMART has certainly saved our butts more than once. Joshua D. Drake -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance
