Richard Woods wrote:
This message is written, not as a criticism, nor chastisement,
but in the hopes that I can contribute to the future success
of the GIMPS project. Having been once caught in a similar
circumstance in about 1984 or so, and having learned some hard
won knowledge of these matters in this way, I hope to pass along
some of what I learned, and possibly contribute toward devising
some of the recommendations I urge upon the project.
> Torben Schl?ntz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
>> And I don't understand why it should be so hard to get
>> a backup up rolling for the old version.
>
> The disk that failed was part of a relatively antique (this is an
> unpaid volunteer project, after all) RAID 0 array. It's a hardware
> delay, not a matter of getting a backup running. When the project is
[...]
The backup in question is one of DATA, not HARDWARE.
I asked the same question, more politely, and was completely
ignored. Mr.Schluentz' message, by this criterion, is a better
one than mine, whatever you may think of its tone.
Whatever hardware is running the current server software could
be loaded with a data backup of the older version and be running
it NOW. It could have been running in a few hours, probably less
than one day, if a proper data backup existed.
While we're looking in dictionaries, I see the third definition
is
amateur - n. (3) One who does something without professional skill
or ease. -amateurism n.
which seems to fit the tone of Mr. Schluentz' message.
As for me, I don't demand anything from a bunch of people who contribute
their own time and money to a project with no remuneration. I do,
however, maintain backups of my own machines, and keep them off
site. If my house burned down, I could have my own personal
computer back up and running, with a loss of just a few day's
data, within a few hours. My latest backups I keep at home for
convenience, so I'd lose a few days, but on a regular basis
I move my older backups off site. Also, since I don't back
up every day, I'd lose a few days with any complete hard disc
failure, though I could remedy that simply by doing backups
every day, should I so chose.
I _expect_ (not _demand_) that anyone who expends significant amounts
of time, effort, and money, and involving the participation and
contribution of time, efforts, and monies of other people would, for
his own peace of mind, maintain a regular backup schedule with off site
storage, and have tested his ability to recover from total hardware
loss. I have done so with my own personal computer, which does not
involve any other persons, their time, efforts, or monies.
I am _shocked_ and _dismayed_ (not _angry_) that this was, apparently,
not done.
I _hope_ (not _demand_) that a periodic backup regimen is being
initiated, if, as it appears, no such backup schedule exists.
I believe it is completely appropriate that those who, understandably,
expect, as do I, that such a backup schedule would exist in these
circumstances, would be shocked, dismayed, and discouraged from
continuing with the project, given the apparent lack of foresight
on the part of those responsible, especially since the
response seems to indicate a belief that the current emergency
situation is one which was not under their control, when in
actuality, a proper backup would mean that there was, in fact,
no emergency at all, but rather only a momentary lapse of service.
I believe it is perfectly reasonable for the participants in this
project to expect, and receive, an explanation for why a simple
disc failure resulted in an emergency. No such explanation has
been forthcoming. I believe it is perfectly reasonable for the
participants in this project to expect, and receive, a description
of what plan of action has been implemented to prevent a similar
future occurrence from being an emergency. No such description
has been forthcoming.
I do not believe that it is reasonable for the participants
in this project to _demand_ anything as a result of the current
emergency. I do think it is reasonable for the participants to
re evaluate their willingness to continue with the project,
given the unexpected current situation.
While the exact moment in time at which a hard disc will fail is
not, even in principle, predictable, it is a certainty that
every hard disc is eventually going to fail, and it is possible to
have a plan of action for when that eventuality takes place.
That's why we all have spare tires and jacks in our automobiles.
They are our tire failure plan of action. Regular backups,
stored off site, with appropriate access, are an appropriate
disc failure plan of action.
Not having a plan of action, or having an inadequate plan of
action, is a plan for a failure not being a momentary nuisance,
but an emergency resulting in a hasty and not well thought
out response. The only way to ascertain whether a plan of action
is adequate is actually to test it, by simulating a complete
loss of whatever the plan is supposed to protect. In this case,
one needs to simulate the complete loss of all hardware associated
with the project. This can be as simple as taking a cheap[*], old
computer, wiping the disc, and pretending that it is a newly
bought blank computer, using the backup to restore it to
operability, and then testing it for proper functionality,
though not, perhaps, for speed performance.
Plans of action need regular review, and modification.
If, as seems likely, the current plan of action is "Rely upon
RAID for data recovery, and obtain a replacement disc", then
it seems that the plan has perhaps been reviewed insufficiently
often. Part of an extended plan of action is a review of
current practices, and modification of same, as necessary,
with retest.
Using RAID is not a substitute for backups. A single lightning
strike nearby can destroy all discs in an array. A fire can destroy
all discs in an array, along with locally stored backups. One
needs to evaluate just how disastrous an event is being protected
against, and then plan accordingly. My backups are stored
thirteen miles distant from my house. A tornado could conceivably
damage all backups. One can't protect against every eventuality.
Part of plan design and review is careful assessment of cost
versus benefit, chosing what is being protected against,
and planning accordingly. I would try to enlist the
aid of some who may be more knowledgeable in such planning
and review and test design. I'm sure there are some in the
project who would be willing to help on that score.
One needs to consider what data to back up, what media to
use, how often to back up, and carefully plan off site
storage and access, based on how long one is willing to be
"down" and how much data one is willing to lose in an event.
One needs to plan recovery procedures with these in mind, as well.
Sometimes, staged recovery is beneficial, providing some
measure of recovery immediately, with perhaps some data
loss, which can later be more fully recovered and merged
with more data at a later time, perhaps days later. There
might be some person(s) willing to "mirror" the site,
providing instant recovery of service, and easing the
burden of the one maintaing backups of the primary copy.
This could perhaps result in practial impossibility of
complete data loss, due to geograhic redundancy.
If there exists a collection of undamaged backups available,
then I don't understand why they are not being used. If there
is no backup, then I strongly encourage the persons responsible
to educate themselves in what constitutes an adequate backup
regimen for their needs, and institute same instanter. In either
case, I strongly urge the responsible persons to give the project
participants the expected responses explaining why the disc failure
precipitated an emergency, and what steps are being taken to
prevent that from happening in future.
Failing that, I fear that the project is going to suffer some
attrition.
[*] Cheap, as in
I have two I picked up off the side of the road,
being thrown away, in working condition.
I have two which I bought for $1 USD each, in non working
condition, at a swap meet, and used the two to make
a single working machine. One had a bad disc drive;
the other had a bad power supply. The two together
made a single machine with double the memory.
I have one I was given by a friend as non working, and
which I put into service for the cost of $15 USD, by
simply purchasing a used power supply from a computer
upgrade store front run by an individual. True, I bought
it with no warrantee, but then it's still working over
a year later.
In other words, cheap. Resourcefulness and ingenuity make up
for a large lack of funds in many endeavors. This is one of
them.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
Oppose globalization and One World Governments like the UN.
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
_______________________________________________
Prime mailing list
Prime@hogranch.com
http://hogranch.com/mailman/listinfo/prime
