What you call pathologic cases when it comes to real-world data are
very common. It is not at all unusual to find sectors filled with only
a constant (usually zero, but not always), in which case your **512
becomes **1.
Of course it would be easy to check how many of the 512 Bytes are really
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008, Thiemo Nagel wrote:
What you call pathologic cases when it comes to real-world data are very
common. It is not at all unusual to find sectors filled with only a
constant (usually zero, but not always), in which case your **512 becomes
**1.
Of course it would be easy to
Mattias Wadenstein wrote:
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008, Thiemo Nagel wrote:
What you call pathologic cases when it comes to real-world data are
very common. It is not at all unusual to find sectors filled with
only a constant (usually zero, but not always), in which case your
**512 becomes **1.
Of
Mattias Wadenstein wrote:
On Mon, 7 Jan 2008, Thiemo Nagel wrote:
What you call pathologic cases when it comes to real-world data are
very common. It is not at all unusual to find sectors filled with
only a constant (usually zero, but not always), in which case your
**512 becomes **1.
Of
Thiemo Nagel wrote:
Inverting your argumentation, that means when we don't see z = n or
inconsistent z numbers, multidisc corruption can be excluded statistically.
For errors occurring on the level of hard disk blocks (signature: most
bytes of the block have D errors, all with same z), the
Thiemo Nagel wrote:
For errors occurring on the level of hard disk blocks (signature: most
bytes of the block have D errors, all with same z), the probability for
multidisc corruption to go undetected is ((n-1)/256)**512. This might
pose a problem in the limiting case of n=255, however for
Thiemo Nagel wrote:
For errors occurring on the level of hard disk blocks (signature: most
bytes of the block have D errors, all with same z), the probability
for
multidisc corruption to go undetected is ((n-1)/256)**512. This might
pose a problem in the limiting case of n=255, however for
Thiemo Nagel wrote:
That's why I was asking about the generator. Theoretically, this
situation might be countered by using a (pseudo-)random pattern of
generators for the different bytes of a sector, though I'm not sure
whether it is worth the effort.
Changing the generator is
H. Peter Anvin wrote:
I got a private email a while ago from Thiemo Nagel claiming that some
of the conclusions in my RAID-6 paper was incorrect. This was
combined with a proof which was plain wrong, and could easily be
disproven using basic enthropy accounting (i.e. how much information
is
Bill Davidsen wrote:
H. Peter Anvin wrote:
I got a private email a while ago from Thiemo Nagel claiming that some
of the conclusions in my RAID-6 paper was incorrect. This was
combined with a proof which was plain wrong, and could easily be
disproven using basic enthropy accounting (i.e. how
I got a private email a while ago from Thiemo Nagel claiming that some
of the conclusions in my RAID-6 paper was incorrect. This was combined
with a proof which was plain wrong, and could easily be disproven
using basic enthropy accounting (i.e. how much information is around to
play with.)
11 matches
Mail list logo
