[tahoe-dev] erasure coding makes files more fragile, not less
m-- at gmx.com
Wed Mar 28 21:44:49 UTC 2012
On 28/03/12 21:54, Brian Warner wrote:
> Yes, the math in our provisioning/reliability tool describes a somewhat
> unrealistic model with the usual because-it-makes-the-math-easier
> assumptions (Poisson processes, independent identically-distributed
> failures). Should we get rid of it? No, I think it still has value.
> Should we add some warning stickers that say "human error and
> non-independent failure modes will probably limit how close you can get
> to these numbers"? Sure. If people ignore those stickers and believe the
> fairy-tale math and drive too fast and crash and burn, should we throw
> out the math? No, I think the tools are still useful to people who
> understand the limits of the model.
Just wanted to say I'm enjoying pretending this is a thread about credit
default swaps in 2007.
More information about the tahoe-dev