From 99beacf63a37d315fb0f87cd2aa628f6e1980277 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joshua Boniface Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 19:09:54 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] Further tweaked wording --- content/2.md | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/content/2.md b/content/2.md index 4b8567e..d17f278 100644 --- a/content/2.md +++ b/content/2.md @@ -10,9 +10,9 @@ Having a number of disks in RAID may **seem** like a backup, especially if you'r RAID protects you against one and only one thing: a disk failure. It does **not** protect you against any of the following things: * Multiple disk failures beyond the RAID level chosen (e.g. both disks in a mirror, or 3 disks in a RAID-6). -* Failure of the RAID controller itself (especially when using hardware RAID), the computer itself, or the environment (a flood, or fire, perhaps). +* Failure of the RAID controller itself (especially when using hardware RAID), the computer running the RAID, or the environment (a flood, fire, theft, etc.). * Data corruption on-disk from filesystem bugs, cosmic rays, or minor hardware or firmware failures. -* Malicious or accidental deletion or modification of files by yourself or another party, including viruses, bad application writes, or administrative mistakes (e.g. `rm`ing the wrong file or `mkfs` on an existing filesystem). +* Malicious or accidental deletion or modification of files by yourself or another party, including viruses, bad application writes, or administrative mistakes (e.g. `rm`-ing the wrong file or `mkfs` on an existing filesystem). Even ZFS, designed specifically to prevent the third point, is still susceptable to the others.