|
Grex > Helpers > #145: Upgrading Grex to 3.8 - a postmortem | |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 13 new of 62 responses total. |
nharmon
|
|
response 50 of 62:
| 
Nov 21 18:35 UTC 2005 |
Not even with an electron microscope, STeve? I bet if there were child
pr0n on that disk, the FBI would find a way to recover it.
<nharmon gets an idea>
|
tod
|
|
response 51 of 62:
|
Nov 21 18:38 UTC 2005 |
I dont mind, STeve. I forward all mail to gmail.
|
steve
|
|
response 52 of 62:
|
Nov 21 18:56 UTC 2005 |
Nope, not even with an electron microscope. We *far* beyond the
era when it was possible to divine data on disks in most cases. When
the flux changes per centimeter were a few tens of millions, yes you
could. But with densities as they are now, no. It's a load of BS,
or FUD, the concept that peole can ressurect data from any disk.
In teh case of Grex we're constantly over writing data. So how is
a hierarchy of understanding to be made for which bits belong to
which "generation" of data on a sector? The answer is you can't
on a busy disk. Data on a disk which has been "erased" and then
left alone probably can be read but there are still challenging
issues on how to read the data.
I know of a company near Grand Rapids that lost data on an
active 200G IDE disk, and two data recovery companies declined
to look at the disk after they asked if the disk was actively
used after the data loss.
There was a time though, when you could get nickel power and
suspend it in naptha, and dribble it on the platter of a disk and
see the patterns on the disk. That was a long time ago...
|
nharmon
|
|
response 53 of 62:
|
Nov 21 20:32 UTC 2005 |
Interesting.
|
davel
|
|
response 54 of 62:
|
Nov 22 20:46 UTC 2005 |
Um, nickel *powder*?
|
steve
|
|
response 55 of 62:
|
Nov 22 21:00 UTC 2005 |
Yes. As fine as can be had. It can align up with small flux
changes.
|
photeus
|
|
response 56 of 62:
|
Nov 29 19:07 UTC 2005 |
When can we expect "bind" to be reinstalled?
|
tsty
|
|
response 57 of 62:
|
Nov 30 07:57 UTC 2005 |
what ever happeneed the the disk(s) that no one wasnted to try to
resurrect with spin6 - and my fervent bleating to the incongniscenti?
botching a backup is one thing .. botching an os change is damn near
intolerable .. the more i read about 'we couldn't get along well' the more
i am pissed a BORG for *failing* to supervise!
adn in my pissy mood right now (!) i'd bet the natioiinal deficit that
no one directly involved in the changeover eithr got a higher
classification than 'brownie' or went theorouh basic training.
w h a t w e r e y o u a l l t h i n k i n g ?????
<<who was thinking??>>
|
steve
|
|
response 58 of 62:
|
Nov 30 13:29 UTC 2005 |
TS, when has the board ever "supervised" technical changes? Thats
absurd. Look, a mistake was made. I made it. I deeply regret that
and am working on ways to reduce this possibility in the future. And,
I'll point out that "botching" an OS upgrade is something that happens
from time to time, just like any other mistake.
|
naftee
|
|
response 59 of 62:
|
Nov 30 19:00 UTC 2005 |
i forgive you, steVE !
|
aruba
|
|
response 60 of 62:
|
Dec 1 04:14 UTC 2005 |
Re #57: If you mean the disk that died last spring, it was returned to
Seagate under warranty. They sent us a replacement, rebuilt drive. It is
sitting on my desk, awaiting a use.
|
tsty
|
|
response 61 of 62:
|
Dec 1 05:40 UTC 2005 |
aruba ... it could have been used for a non-in-place backup, right?
i'm glad there was a replacement, btw, fwiw.
i am semi-remembering that someone said the upgrade was an 'in-place'
operation (i may be mis-rememberng, dunno).
to me that means there was zero consideration for 'oops' when other
hardware was available. shit, if there is anyone around here who
understands 'oops' better tha i do ... speak up now or forever hold
your codpiece.
if i am correct in remembering 'in place' as the upgrade method, and
no one considered teh *inherent DANGER* of such a move .... adn there
was hardware available ... a check list available ...
were janc, remmers, STeve & whomeever blind/deaf/dumb or just religious?
|
tsty
|
|
response 62 of 62:
|
Dec 2 19:19 UTC 2005 |
.. taht means they had 'faith' - religious faith that everyting would work
out alright .... no matter what.
|