kevin gilmore Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 It is possible that jude actually will have learned something from this experience. Next time he won't be caught with his pants down around his ankles. So if we all rub it in REAL GOOD then he will do it right from now on. Fat chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archosman Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 ...This is not just a head-fi thing, its jude's core business. If he does not get that raid set back up, he might as well plan on flipping burgers at McDonalds for the rest of his life. Worst case scenario - that could be the death of Head-Fi. Wonder how forgiving his clients will be? Could be costly... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n_maher Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 I have no desire to pour salt in Jude's wound. He's a man down right now and shit, I hope he can get his life back up and running soon. I am somewhat surprised to learn that Head-Fi and his businesses shared server/drive space since I thought that the equipment that Head-Fi ran on was paid for by a donation from Meier (the headfive, IIRC). Anyone else remember reading a post about that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin gilmore Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 Worst case scenario - that could be the death of Head-Fi. Wonder how forgiving his clients will be? Could be costly... When they find out the truth (and they will) they will not be forgiving at all. Jude has a lawyer at his becon call (and not that idiot in florida either), Bet that lawyer is gonna be busy real soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grawk Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 I have no desire to pour salt in Jude's wound. He's a man down right now and shit, I hope he can get his life back up and running soon. I am somewhat surprise to learn that Head-Fi and his businesses shared server/drive space since I thought that the equipment that Head-Fi ran on was paid for by a donation from Meier (the headfive, IIRC). Anyone else remember reading a post about that? The impression I get is that the nas device was just used to back up the servers, but they were in the process of rebuilding headfi in a clustered environment, so they'd probably wiped the servers. Then the nas had problems, causing a world of poop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
granodemostasa Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 I just realized he just quoted from one of Jude's other websites...my bad. i'm still mad that you critizied my taste in music...you are officially *shunned* psst. your tastes in music is not worth praising, it certainly ain't worth being neutral over, what choice had she? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin gilmore Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 Have you seen the price on hard drives lately?? No one in their right mind would ever wipe a server when they can throw in a brand new drive or set of drives at $100 each. I'll quit now, i've picked on jude enough for today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grawk Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 Have you seen the price on hard drives lately?? No one in their right mind would ever wipe a server when they can throw in a brand new drive or set of drives at $100 each. I'll quit now, i've picked on jude enough for today. I guess I'm not in my right mind. I wipe servers for upgrades with some regularity. I back up the stuff I will need, and wipe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n_maher Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 The impression I get is that the nas device was just used to back up the servers, but they were in the process of rebuilding headfi in a clustered environment, so they'd probably wiped the servers. Then the nas had problems, causing a world of poop. Thanks for explaining that Dan, that makes a lot more sense now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin gilmore Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 The impression I get is that the nas device was just used to back up the servers, but they were in the process of rebuilding headfi in a clustered environment, so they'd probably wiped the servers. Then the nas had problems, causing a world of poop. If that was the case, then only head-fi would have gone down. Lots of other stuff went down at the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBLoudG20 Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 Hey nicknutsack.. I was about to rag on you for just some random shit.. but your Office reference redeemed you for a long time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archosman Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 So all you computer experts out there... what do you figure the chances are that they'll be able to recover it? After all of this time? I would guess that the client sites will come first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n_maher Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 Based on my limited understanding of it it's all the same nut to crack. The NAS was just a large storage device setup with a RAID array to self protect itself. The device controlling the RAID array and therefore what data was stored where since multiple drives were used to ghost a single large volume (or something like that) went tits up. When it did it probably lost the allocation table or the address configuration or something along those lines. So all the data is probably sitting there and just fine but has no way of reconnecting itself. The fact that the first recovery process didn't work is a pretty bad omen in my book. So all you computer experts out there... what do you figure the chances are that they'll be able to recover it? After all of this time? I would guess that the client sites will come first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pabbi1 Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 So all you computer experts out there... what do you figure the chances are that they'll be able to recover it? After all of this time? I would guess that the client sites will come first. It is all the same thing - most likely tits up in a total scramble. This is where the data recovery guys might be smelling a really fat payday, because even a 99.9% recovery, depending on the data lost, will still be totally unacceptable. Lawyers at dawn action. This really freaks me out, as I have a 128 Tb SAN, and have paid a lot of $$$ for redundancy, monitoring and backup systems - just no way to REALLY test a complete disaster recovery in our topology. This is a real world case study for my Product Manager. My responsibility is the code, but if the data gets whacked... there but by the grace of God (and MOM / StoreVault) go I. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordgtlover Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 Yep - not wanting to slag anybody, but mirroring and 'snapshots' are all well and good but when the shit hits the fan you always want to have that last line of defence - tapebackups. Cross your fingers and hit the 'recover' button. Recovering an array is a PITA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bhd812 Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 What if headfi would go back up but in future time, like in the spaceballs movie... "wtf am i looking at?" "your looking at a post your typing right now. its a new thing where the reply is posted before you even think of it." "so where am i now in posting on headfi?" :your looking at your typing now sir" "what happened to then?" "when?" "now?" "wtf?" ok i messed that movie quote up but you get the idea... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomana Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 Pretty, are you already drunk on your birthday? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bhd812 Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 Pretty, are you already drunk on your birthday? sadly no...but thanks for asking. i am so tired cause i drove Todd around record shopping today..from the southside to the northside 3 times over. the hotel is so stacked! Vicki you and the flori gang should come down..dont worry you can stay at Rays place for free... just dont tell him i told you..ssshhhh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickknutson Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 Hey nicknutsack.. I was about to rag on you for just some random shit.. but your Office reference redeemed you for a long time Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomB Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 Yeah, I'm kind of with Grawk - the best rebuild is a clean one from a virgin wipe. The problem is that Jude had so much crap built on top of things with all that advertising, there's probably no way to re-create things in a stable manner. The further away you get from the base forum software, the harder it will be to re-create it in a stable state. Did anyone notice that d*mn "Intellitext" that went on in the last few months? That stuff is a virus all on its own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin gilmore Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 This really freaks me out, as I have a 128 Tb SAN, and have paid a lot of $$$ for redundancy, monitoring and backup systems - just no way to REALLY test a complete disaster recovery in our topology. Yes there is a way to test it, but it gets very expensive. You get a complete second copy of the hardware to do a disaster restore from tape, and then check to see that it works. Although i only have a few Tb, i have done this test on my hardware stack 3 times now, every time a firmware upgrade happens. This is why you buy EMC, IBM, or SUN. Not a toy running rom based linux. Even so, 6 years back EMC had a bad batch of boards, did not tell anyone, and ended up in a gigantic lawsuit. Tape backups removed to secure locations are absolutely necessary. Jude's plans for world domination of the headphone world have been canceled. And yes payback is a bitch. The creator says not to gloat in the misery of others, but what jude has done to me and my friends, and the way he treats everyone is so condecending that he deserves this and much more. Jude needs to stop lying and look in the mirror for the source of all his trouble. He believed too much of his own bullshit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkam Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 This really freaks me out, as I have a 128 Tb SAN, and have paid a lot of $$$ for redundancy, monitoring and backup systems - just no way to REALLY test a complete disaster recovery in our topology. Well I think the problem your seeing in this case is that the live data and the backups were kept on the same NAS device this is a major no no. I'll assume in your case that you'd be a little smarter and not keep live data and backups on the same device . Hardware fails it's the nature of the beast which is why backups should always be on a different device and/or off-site depending on the importance of the data. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chekhonte Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 Oh snap! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aerius Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 It's pretty sad when the pictures from my digital camera and the porn I've downloaded off the 'net have more redundant backups than head-fi does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin gilmore Posted November 17, 2007 Report Share Posted November 17, 2007 It's pretty sad when the porn I've downloaded off the 'net have more redundant backups than head-fi does. Nope, not gonna touch that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.