From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lars Marowsky-Bree Subject: Re: RAID1 and data safety? Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 14:13:57 +0200 Message-ID: <20050329121357.GK9998@marowsky-bree.de> References: <76592C4D3DA1AC4FB8424084D10D31A80611527B@mchh2c4e.mchh.siemens.de> <6kjnh2-qn4.ln1@news.it.uc3m.es> <16969.10587.679662.55065@cse.unsw.edu.au> <8kqnh2-o1n.ln1@news.it.uc3m.es> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8kqnh2-o1n.ln1@news.it.uc3m.es> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Peter T. Breuer" , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 2005-03-29T13:26:32, "Peter T. Breuer" wrote: > > Not good advice. DO put the journal on a raid device. It is much > > safer there. > Two journals means two possible sources of unequal information - plus the > two datasets. We have been through this before. You get the journal > you deserve. The RAID never exposes this potential inconsistency to the higher levels though. Indeed, you get what you deserve. -- High Availability & Clustering SUSE Labs, Research and Development SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - A Novell Business