Skip to main content
7 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jul 10, 2016 at 10:05 comment added Philip Kendall Nobody has uncorruptible storage. Even S3 is "only" 12 nines.
Jul 9, 2016 at 18:56 comment added Harry Harrison @PhilipKendall I agree regarding manual intervention, my point was that if you have a "write-once" scenario and uncorruptible storage, then sync from this, not the other way around.
Jul 9, 2016 at 18:42 comment added Philip Kendall @HarryHarrison I disagree. I don't want to automatically sync from (e.g.) my NAS to my local hard disk just because my NAS is more reliable - there's still a chance it's the NAS that's screwed up, not my local hard disk (or actually far more likely, I fat fingered something and messed up the file on the NAS myself). Manual intervention is what's needed here - it shouldn't be that common, unless you're Associated Press.
Jul 9, 2016 at 17:00 comment added Michael @MichaelKjörling their client automatically detects the change to the local copy of the photo and uploads the new version, which is corrupted. Actually, this is an interesting point, because unless the corruption is in a software layer the client won't actually be able to detect the corruption unless you re-write the file.
Jul 9, 2016 at 15:31 comment added Harry Harrison @MichaelKjörling using the online storage as a secondary slave copy of the data will have this effect, but storing the master copy in uncorruptible storage. In general always sync from more reliable storage to less reliable storage.
Jul 9, 2016 at 14:53 comment added user "use an online storage service which will handle all redundancy, and file integrity for you."... and their client automatically detects the change to the local copy of the photo and uploads the new version, which is corrupted. Cloud storage is no substitute for good backup policies and some way of actually detecting corruption. Compare What's needed for a complete backup system?.
Jul 9, 2016 at 11:05 history answered Harry Harrison CC BY-SA 3.0