xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Data Corruption Problem

To: netllama@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Data Corruption Problem
From: mahesh.babbar@xxxxxx
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 21:32:43 +0530
Cc: mahesh.babbar@xxxxxx, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.55.0307301129420.3191@linux-sxs.org>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
     Hi Lonnie
     
     I am sorry If I was being offending, but want to present following 
     facts here. Please challenge me :
     
     Evidence is 
     
     1. I have lost a big chunk of data. In the range of GBs. It was 
     commercially important data.
     
     2. In my 10 years of carreer, I have never seen a Sun(UFS) or an 
     HPUX(JFS) or an AIX box(JFS) corrupting data like what I have seen or 
     what Aman has faced.
     
     2. You will say "LATEST" code resolves most of the issues. Accepted. 
     But is there a version, X or Y or Z (old or latest, a user doesn't 
     care) which is STABLE. 
     
     What I mean by stability is, a technical person (which you all are) 
     can say " I am confident that IT WORKS". 
     
     3. In an envrionment which involves *real* customers and where each 
     second counts and data means hard dollors, no body bothers about CODES 
     and their versions. So please don't distribute something (even free) 
     in the name of 
     
     * it's latest
     * It's gives better performance 
     * It's this , it's that 
     
     BUT 
     
     when it comes to stability, It all depends. Which as per me is the 
     most important factor.
     
     It may work on our personal laptops/labs/academies but not in 
     commercial sector.
     
     Mahesh
     
     
     
     


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: RE: Data Corruption Problem
Author:  netllama (netllama@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) at internet
Date:    7/30/2003 9:00 PM


On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 mahesh.babbar@xxxxxx wrote: 
>      Freinds,
>
>      Please recall that a week before I put up a similar problem and I was 
>      told that the problem could be beause of the ancient code of XFS (2
>      years old) I am running on my box. 
>
>      Answer was that new XFS code is stable, proven and works without any 
>      issues and there no *VERY CRITICAL* issues like data corruption.
>
>      Aman's problem's source may have been different to mine but the
>      bottomlime is that "There could still be a major stability issue even 
>      with newer XFS codes".
>
>      Steve/Lonnie : I don't want to sound un-neccessarily finiky and I 
>      completely trust communitiy's ability to set things right, my only 
>      submission is that there could still be grey areas
     
And the moon might be blue on alternate sundays in June.  Please don't 
spread FUD.  If you have evidence of a problem, then present it, against 
the latest released stable XFS codebase.  If not, then don't raise doubt 
over something that you have a hunch on without any real evidence.
     
-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
Lonni J Friedman                                netllama@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Linux Step-by-step & TyGeMo                  http://netllama.ipfox.com
     
     


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>