Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!pacbell!pacbell.com!ucsd!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!van-bc!rsoft!frank
From: frank@rsoft.bc.ca (Frank I. Reiter)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.i386
Subject: Re: Disk Mirroring (was Re: Altos 5000)
Message-ID: <89@rsoft.bc.ca>
Date: 31 Aug 90 17:10:16 GMT
References: <1990Aug16.174514.2646@NCoast.ORG> <15759@bfmny0.BFM.COM> <1990Aug27.183821.13518@ico.isc.com> <3895@altos86.Altos.COM>
Reply-To: frank@rsoft.UUCP (Frank I. Reiter)
Organization: Reiter Software Inc., British Columbia
Lines: 18

In article <3895@altos86.Altos.COM> dtynan@altos86.Altos.COM (Dermot Tynan) writes:
>
>See above.  Nobody is trying to produce a fault-free system.  We are just
>trying to reduce the likelihood of having to restore a filesystem.  Believe
>me.  Disk mirroring will slow down disk writes (which aren't the bulk of
>disk operations, anyway), but it will double your disk reliability.

Maybe I've missed something, but it seems to me that the results should be
orders of magnitude better than that.  Let's say that the odds of a particular
drive failing on a particular day are 1 in 1000.  The odds of both drives
failing on that day are then 1 in 1000000 are they not?  Does not mirroring
mean that both drives must fail simultaneously in order for there to be loss
of data?
-- 
_____________________________________________________________________________
Frank I. Reiter              UUCP:  {uunet,ubc-cs}!van-bc!rsoft!frank
Reiter Software Inc.                frank@rsoft.bc.ca,  a2@mindlink.UUCP
Surrey, British Columbia      BBS:  Mind Link @ (604)576-1214, login as Guest