Bill Davidsen wrote:
Trond Myklebust wrote:
Nobody gives a rats arse about backups: those are infrequent and
can/should use more sophisticated techniques such as checksumming.
Actually, those of us who do run production servers care vastly about
backups. And beside being utterly unscalable (checksum 20 TB of files
four times a day to find what changed???), you would have to remember
the checksums for all those files.
The point of using checksums (or digital signatures on files) is to be
able to detect when the on disk file has been corrupted - not to look
for updates. With normal disks, even writes that are flagged as correct
will occasionally actually end up corrupt on disk. The rate that you
need to validate the checksums is not at a 4 time a day rate.
Buying a nice, high array can make this much less of a concern, but
those of us who get stuck using commodity disks should always have a way
of detecting corruption and a backup (either on tape or on another box).
ric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
