4 ms·

You are saying we are going to see similar reports for Linux when using these parts? Why did it started happening after a windows update then? And why did it ne

You are saying we are going to see similar reports for Linux when using these parts? Why did it started happening after a windows update then? And why did it need a patch?

gruez 1y ago
>You are saying we are going to see similar reports for Linux when using these parts? The linux install base is orders of magnitude smaller than windows, so there's less of a chance that it gets picked up by tech media. Moreover if it's really an issue with the underlying hardware itself, a more technical user base would be able to trace the issue to the actual hardware, rather than going straight to social media with "ZOMG windows update bricked my PC!" >Why did it started happening after a windows update then? Some sort of code change that changes the behavior of the drive, but is technically within spec. >And why did it need a patch? Because putting in a patch doesn't imply you're at fault. The linux kernel is filled with workarounds for crappy hardware as well. The existence of those workarounds don't imply linux was somehow at fault for those bugs.
- gchamonlive 1y ago
  > if it's really an issue with the underlying hardware itself, a more technical user base would be able to trace the issue to the actual hardware, rather than going straight to social media with "ZOMG windows update bricked my PC!" So what you are saying is that users went "ZOMG windows update bricked my PC!" And that prompted the article? > Because putting in a patch doesn't imply you're at fault If you designed a system for certain range of hardware, your latest update broke that design and you had to go back and put a patch, I'd say it's pretty much Microsoft at fault here, even though your comment is right
  - gruez 1y ago
    >So what you are saying is that users went "ZOMG windows update bricked my PC!" And that prompted the article? Most tech "journalism" is basically regurgitating stuff from reddit/twitter/other tech sites, so yes. >If you designed a system for certain range of hardware, your latest update broke that design and you had to go back and put a patch, I'd say it's pretty much Microsoft at fault here, even though your comment is right So there's no accounting for which party broke the spec? Whoever touched it last is at fault?
colejohnson66 1y ago
You do: https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/discussions/14793 https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/discussions/14793
- gchamonlive 1y ago
  Good thing defaults for domestic systems are ext4 and btrfs, not zfs which needs a ton of memory and server grade hardware?
  - jlokier 1y ago
    ext4 or btrfs won't save you either. Although that bug report is for ZFS on the same SSD as the Windows article (WD SN770), the faults described in the Linux bug report look like would also happen with ext4 or btrfs. So I searched for reported problems with SN770 and ext4, and found enough results to convince me. That particular SSD fails with Linux and ext4 too.

You are saying we are going to see similar reports for Linux when using these parts? Why did it started happening after a windows update then? And why did it need a patch?

gruez 1y ago

>You are saying we are going to see similar reports for Linux when using these parts? The linux install base is orders of magnitude smaller than windows, so there's less of a chance that it gets picked up by tech media. Moreover if it's really an issue with the underlying hardware itself, a more technical user base would be able to trace the issue to the actual hardware, rather than going straight to social media with "ZOMG windows update bricked my PC!" >Why did it started happening after a windows update then? Some sort of code change that changes the behavior of the drive, but is technically within spec. >And why did it need a patch? Because putting in a patch doesn't imply you're at fault. The linux kernel is filled with workarounds for crappy hardware as well. The existence of those workarounds don't imply linux was somehow at fault for those bugs.

gchamonlive 1y ago
> if it's really an issue with the underlying hardware itself, a more technical user base would be able to trace the issue to the actual hardware, rather than going straight to social media with "ZOMG windows update bricked my PC!" So what you are saying is that users went "ZOMG windows update bricked my PC!" And that prompted the article? > Because putting in a patch doesn't imply you're at fault If you designed a system for certain range of hardware, your latest update broke that design and you had to go back and put a patch, I'd say it's pretty much Microsoft at fault here, even though your comment is right
- gruez 1y ago
  >So what you are saying is that users went "ZOMG windows update bricked my PC!" And that prompted the article? Most tech "journalism" is basically regurgitating stuff from reddit/twitter/other tech sites, so yes. >If you designed a system for certain range of hardware, your latest update broke that design and you had to go back and put a patch, I'd say it's pretty much Microsoft at fault here, even though your comment is right So there's no accounting for which party broke the spec? Whoever touched it last is at fault?

colejohnson66 1y ago

You do: https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/discussions/14793 https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/discussions/14793

gchamonlive 1y ago
Good thing defaults for domestic systems are ext4 and btrfs, not zfs which needs a ton of memory and server grade hardware?
- jlokier 1y ago
  ext4 or btrfs won't save you either. Although that bug report is for ZFS on the same SSD as the Windows article (WD SN770), the faults described in the Linux bug report look like would also happen with ext4 or btrfs. So I searched for reported problems with SN770 and ext4, and found enough results to convince me. That particular SSD fails with Linux and ext4 too.