discuss: A question of wording
Subject:
Re: A question of wording
From:
Vineet Chadha ####@####.####
Date:
24 Feb 2004 03:20:04 -0000
Message-Id: <Pine.GSO.4.33.0402232216140.15457-100000@sand.cise.ufl.edu>
Yes, Robustness is appropirate word. Even, we can call system to be
fault tolerant or highly avaible. Generally, word meaning is obvious
from the context of its use.
Regards,
Vineet
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, David Horton wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This may be somewhat off-topic, but it is related to documentation writing.
>
> I'm trying to find the right word(s) to say that a system has features
> that make it hard to break or easy to recover from failure. Is that
> fault-tolerance, redundancy, high-availability or what? I know that all
> of these words mean different things to different people. For example I
> would say that redundancy is good, like "RAID arrays have redundancy
> that keeps the system up when one drive fails." But I understand that
> redundancy in Britain is often a reason for losing one's job, what in
> the States is called "being laid-off." So maybe that's a bad term.
> What's a good term that won't be confusing? Any ideas?
>
> What I'm going for is this, "building statically-linked versions of
> certain binaries, like a static root shell and a static version of
> e2fsprogs, can add a certain degree of _BLANK_ to the system making it
> easier to recover in the event of a disaster." What goes in the blank?
>
> Dave
>
> ______________________
> http://lists.tldp.org/
>
>
