On Fri, 2024-01-26 at 15:56 +0000, Michael Kjörling wrote: > On 26 Jan 2024 16:11 +0100, from h...@adminart.net (hw): > > I rather spend the money on new batteries (EUR 40 last time after 5 > > years) every couple years [...]
To comment myself, I think was 3 years, not 5, sorry. > > The hardware is usually extremely difficult --- and may be impossible > > --- to replace. > > And let's not forget that you can _plan_ to perform the battery > replacement for whenever that is convenient. How do you know in advance when the battery will have failed? > Which is quite the contrast to a lightning strike blowing out even > _just_ the PSU and it needing replacement before you can even use > the computer again (and you _hope_ that nothing more took a hit, > which it probably did even if the computer _seems_ to be working > fine). It would also hit the display(s), the switches and through that everything that's connected to the network, the server(s) ... That adds up to a lot of money. > [...] > It's also worth talking to your local electrician about installing an > incoming-mains overvoltage protection for lightning protection. I > won't quote prices because I had mine installed a good while ago and > also did it together with some other electrical work, but I was > surprised at how low the cost for that was, and I _know_ that it has > saved me on at least one occasion. Hm I thought it's expensive. I'll ask when I get a chance. > [...] > > You can always tell with a good hardware RAID because it > > will indicate on the trays which disk has failed and the controller > > tells you. > > Or you can label the physical disks. Whenever I replace a disk, I > print a label with the WWN of the new disk and place it so that it is > readable without removing any disks or cabling; That doesn't exactly help when the failed disk has disappeared altogether, as if it had been removed ;) But then, you can go by the numbers of the disks you can still see. And beware of SSDs; when they fail, they're usually entirely inaccessible whereas you may be still able to resuce (some) data from a spinning disk after it failed. It's probably really bad with mainbaords that use M2 storage since apparently, they seem to support only one (of the some type at least) rather than two. So you can't use those at all. What's the point of that? ZFS cache maybe?
