[mythtv-users] Read the question before trying to answer it

[Chris Henderson]

On 6/20/06, Yeechang Lee <ylee at pobox.com> wrote:
>
> Debabrata Banerjee <davatar at comcast.net> says:
> > I already have several other raid arrays in my myth box for other
> > purposes, I am quite sure this is not what I want.
>
>
> > If I suppose nothing to meet these requirements exist, this could be
> > easily implemented in mythtv, actually it 'sort of' does it right
> > now if you use multiple backends with storage. It just can't manage
> > the storage and can't have more than one per server.
>
> Correct; 0.20 is set to add multiple storage locations per backend and
> will thus essentialy do what you are looking to achieve (wilingness to
> accept the possibility of losing part, but not necessarily all,
> recordings if a disk goes down).
>
> I'm even more cavaliar about my recordings than Debabrata is; my 2TB
> NAS uses RAID 1, not RAID 5, so if any of the four disks goes it takes
> the whole array down with it. I've thought about using RAID 5 on it as
> my 2.8TB array does but I can use the extra capacity and hey, we're
> only talking about TV. It'd get filled up again within three months,
> anyway; that's how long it took to get filled up the first time
> around, and ever since it's been a never-ending battle to free up
> enough space for the next day's worth of recordings.
>
> > RAID is slow, complicated, wasteful, and overkill for myth. A single
> > disk can handle many streams of video. A fault-tolerant filesystem
> > and JBOD is what I want.
> >
> > *sigh*
>
> Since Debabrata is apparently polite enough to leave his frustration
> to a single sigh, let me take up the fallen banner of reading
> comprehension. In this case we had not one, not two, but *three*
> geniuses who simply didn't bother to, you know, actually *read the
> message*. The roll of honor includes:
>
> * Tom Lichti, who blithely suggests Debabrata try RAID 5 without
>   noticing that Debabrata explictly says he didn't want to use RAID.
> * Rod, who gives the "Did you Google" answer (a quite appropriate one
>   in many circumstances, I agree) and then suggests a filesystem that
>   a) doesn't do what Debabrata wants to do at all and
>   b) in any case has a complexity that is completely inappropriate to
>   the simple-is-better thrust of Debabrata's message.
> * Chris Henderson, who like Tom also suggests RAID 5 without
>   comprehending what Debabrata is asking (and not asking)
>   for--completely with the requisite condescending "Um"--and then
>   "helpfully" gives a long lecture on what RAID is.
>
> Bravo, gentlemen. Bravo.


Hi

I have actully just deleted a long letter to you telling you.

In the letter/email i treid to expalin I was only trying to help and If i
may have come off condescending, I appologise.
But I deleted the letter, cos in the posts I relised that I was trying to
help and I then tried to explain my thinking but you took that as a lecture.

So I guess I have two choices:
1) Help where I can
2) Dont cos of post like this

But I will try and help, as I can't help develop this product then I will do
this. Isint this why we are all here?

I guess the wheel turns, I may have not fullyunderstood the "polite enough
to leave his frustration to a single sigh," in the post.
I really hope that one day you make a simmilar mistake and somebody better
than me holds you up in font of this board and points at you and this post
and laughs at you.

But i will take your "educational letter" on board.


Thanks for your time.

*sigh*

CH
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mythtv.org/pipermail/mythtv-users/attachments/20060620/a7708b2e/attachment.htm