zlacker

>>tpmx+(OP)
HN was down because the failover server also failed: https://twitter.com/HNStatus/status/1545409429113229312

Double disk failure is improbable but not impossible.

The most impressive thing is that there seems to be no dataloss, almost whatsoever. Whatever the backup system is, it seems rock solid.

>>sillys+z
> Double disk failure is improbable but not impossible.

It's not even improbable if the disks are the same kind purchased at the same time.

>>davedu+b2
Yep: if you buy a pair disks together, there's a fair chance they'll both be from the same manufacturing batch, which correlates with disk defects.

>>spiffy+c7
This makes total sense but I've never heard of it. Is there any literature or writing about this phenomenon?

I guess proper redundancy is having different brands of equipment also in some cases.

>>clinto+4a
I hadn't heard of it either until disks in our storage cluster at work started failing faster than the cluster could rebuild in an event our ops team named SATApocalypse. It was a perfect storm of cascading failures.

https://web.archive.org/web/20220330032426/https://ops.faith...