From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Elsayed Subject: Re: Triple parity and beyond Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2013 20:48:47 -0800 Message-ID: References: <528AA1EB.3010909@zytor.com> <528BCA2D.5010500@redhat.com> <73BEB41F-0FAC-4108-BEA9-DB6D921F6F55@cs.utk.edu> <528D61C5.70902@hardwarefreak.com> <528DADB1.8010604@hardwarefreak.com> <528E8FEC.2070204@hardwarefreak.com> <20131123100753.1820ab7c@notabene.brown> <5290252A.8020508@hardwarefreak.com> <20131123160428.6f1c5898@notabene.brown> <5292B030.5030305@hardwarefreak.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids Stan Hoeppner wrote: "Selection bias" would infer I'm doing some kind of formal analysis, > which is obviously not the case, though I do understand the point you're > making. Nope - the only thing 'selection bias' says is that inferences drawn from a non-representative dataset will also be non-representative. Drawing an inference of 'raid rebuilds are slow' from a mailing list people come to when they need to report an issue will overemphasize problems and deemphasize cases where everything is working properly. Also, no matter how quickly a rebuild goes, it's still longer than people would like. No matter how quickly it finishes, you're still in a stressed state where something has _already_ gone wrong and your parachute is now in use and unable to save you a second time.