From: Rik van Riel Subject: Re: [patch] ext2/3: document conditions when reliable operation is possible Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 23:50:56 -0400 Message-ID: <4A94B120.7020607@redhat.com> References: <20090824230036.GK29763@elf.ucw.cz> <20090825000842.GM17684@mit.edu> <20090825094244.GC15563@elf.ucw.cz> <4A93E908.6050908@redhat.com> <20090825211515.GA3688@elf.ucw.cz> <4A9468E8.607@redhat.com> <20090825225114.GE4300@elf.ucw.cz> <4A946DD1.8090906@redhat.com> <20090825232601.GF4300@elf.ucw.cz> <4A947682.2010204@redhat.com> <20090825235359.GJ4300@elf.ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Ric Wheeler , Theodore Tso , Florian Weimer , Goswin von Brederlow , Rob Landley , kernel list , Andrew Morton , mtk.manpages@gmail.com, rdunlap@xenotime.net, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net To: Pavel Machek Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20090825235359.GJ4300@elf.ucw.cz> Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org Pavel Machek wrote: > If you want to argue that ext3/MD RAID5/no UPS combination is still > less likely to fail than single SATA disk given part fail > probabilities, go ahead and present nice statistics. Its just that I'm > not interested in them. The reality in your document does not match up with the reality out there in the world. That sounds like a good reason not to have your (incorrect) document out there, confusing people. -- All rights reversed.