Re: Do we need more emphasis on backup?

Jim Seymour wrote:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >
> [snip]
> >
> > We do need to point out that you're only as reliable as your last
> > backup. I'm not sure exactly where to say this.
> [snip]
> >
>
> Hmph. Backups are for mitigation against a catastrophic failure
> destroying or corrupting main storage. And even then: Subtle errors
> can induce data corruption that may go un-noticed until it's too late.
> (I.e.: The last correct backups have been over-written, retired, so
> old they've become unreadable, so old the data's no longer useful,
> etc.)
>
> My position is that your data is only as reliable as your hardware,
> period. Use cheap (usually PC, sorry) hardware and, well... I wonder
> how many people are aware of the fact that the cheaper PCs don't even
> have parity memory anymore? Then there are the issues with IDE
> drives. (Don't recall those, exactly - don't use 'em.)

There is a basic misconception that all PC hardware is created equal ---
that hard drives, mother boards, and RAM are all the same because they
are all PC-compatible. Compatible != Similar Quality.

Not sure where we would document this. :-(

Running BSD, I have always had to buy server-class hardware for my home
machines, and I never regretted it nor had a problem.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073