3 ms·
Failing over is correct because there's no way to discern that the hardware is not at fault. They should have designed a better response to the second failure t
by sheepshear 3y ago
Failing over is correct because there's no way to discern that the hardware is not at fault. They should have designed a better response to the second failure to avoid the knock-on effects.
- anentropic 3y agoI don't think anything in this incident pointed to a hardware fault The software raised an exception because a "// TODO: this should never happen" case happened A hardware fault would look like machines not talking to each other or corrupted data file unreadable
- sheepshear 3y agoRetroactive inspection revealed that it wasn't a hardware failure, but the computer didn't know that at the time, and hardware failure can look like anything, so it was correct to exercise its only option.