Live data from Hacker News

Flickr Accidentally Deletes a User's 4,000 Photos and Can't Get Them Back

observer.com

31–40 of 93 posts

Re: Flickr Accidentally Deletes a User's 4,000 Photos and Can't Get Them Back

#31
I keep hearing about this coming up, yet no one ask talked about why the data is irretrievable.

What it implies is that the internal tool(s) that the support staff uses was designed to do deletion instead of status changes. I imagine they have a web interface that fires off some backend script which a) runs sql deletes on an account ID and all tables and b) fires off scripts that physically deletes all photos across all servers.

Taking those implications in hand, it points to an incredibly poorly designed system for account management. Some years ago, there was an internal planning meeting where a decision was made to do this. Some people objected and were overruled. The ramifications of that project manager are still sticking it to people to this day.

I have a hard time believing that Flickr would have purposely engineered their systems in the manner I've described. Not impossible, but unlikely.

So I think its more likely that the data is still there, but that customer service has no method to resurrect it. Its probably a mix of internal policies and the lack of devoting a couple of engineers to fix the problem that is causing all of this.

Re: Flickr Accidentally Deletes a User's 4,000 Photos and Can't Get Them Back

#32
post #31

I keep hearing about this coming up, yet no one ask talked about why the data is irretrievable. What it implies is that the internal tool(s) that the support staff uses was designed to do deletion instead of status changes. I imagine they have a web interface that fires off some backend script which a) runs sql deletes on an account ID and all tables and b) fires off scripts that physically deletes all photos across…

> "some backend script which a) runs sql deletes on an account ID and all tables and b) fires off scripts that physically deletes all photos across all servers."

Neither should happen. You never actually delete rows from your tables. You mark them as deleted, sure, but the data needs to be able to come back. Space is cheap, there are simply very few cases where outright deletion from a DB table is warranted.

I have a hard time believing Flickr would make a mistake like this. I agree with you - odds are if they actually let an engineer loose on this problem it'll be licked with a DB backfill in 20 minutes.

Re: Flickr Accidentally Deletes a User's 4,000 Photos and Can't Get Them Back

#33
post #31

I keep hearing about this coming up, yet no one ask talked about why the data is irretrievable. What it implies is that the internal tool(s) that the support staff uses was designed to do deletion instead of status changes. I imagine they have a web interface that fires off some backend script which a) runs sql deletes on an account ID and all tables and b) fires off scripts that physically deletes all photos across…

It's an engineering decision - Flikr has to host a large amount of data for very little cost, since most users aren't paying. Space isn't cheap by the Petabyte!

The design for a system where you had multiple redundant copies of all the data and could roll back any changes to the data set is different - and would cost a lot more.

Re: Flickr Accidentally Deletes a User's 4,000 Photos and Can't Get Them Back

#34

Seems like a funny policy to not backup production paying customers photos & metadata. Think of all the photos, comments, followers, etc that just got nuked! Seems like they rely on RAID or having multiple copies of the data spread around for disaster recovery. Sure it protects you from a server/raid/hardware failure but when a user/admin does something dumb it can really hurt! Doing a quick google search turns up th…

How about ... RAID isn't backup.

RAID is there for system interruption protection. RAID is there to keep flickr cruising along without interruption.

If they delete content from a volume covered by RAID, then all the mirrored copies go poof simultaneously.

What you are suggesting is a higher level content management system. Apparently (from the drift of the comments) that is something flickr doesn't want to get involved with.

Re: Flickr Accidentally Deletes a User's 4,000 Photos and Can't Get Them Back

#35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get how in todays day and age the person lost their own copies of their photos. All the photographs I have taken with my current camera are still on the memory stick, on my hard drive and in the cloud. Why? Because data storage is massive compared to your average cameras photo quality. My camera holds about 2,000 pictures on the highest compression setting on an 8GB card. It's not like that amount of data is…

TFA: "Mirco Wilhelm has the original files saved elsewhere, but the photos from his extensive Flickr collection had been linked to from all over the web, including the official Flickr blog. Those links will now point to deadspace. Additionally, the followers he had accumulated, tags, photo captions and copyright information have been wiped out and may not be restored" Beyond that, I have well over 2000 photos in my p…

He will have the original photos because any serious photographer will capture them in RAW - which Flikr doesn't store.

The issue though is the links, comments, viewer history and comments that you cannot backup or restore - but which have real value.

Re: Flickr Accidentally Deletes a User's 4,000 Photos and Can't Get Them Back

#36

Would someone really trust Yahoo/Flickr to all their images and not have backups? Hopefully they didn't really care much about the images, else they should have copies elsewhere.

Nope, and neither did the photographer that is being written about.

What isn't backupable, and thus is lost forever is all of the comments he had on the various pictures, all of the groups his pictures belonged to, all of the embed's of pictures on various sites, all of the social aspect of Flickr (such as friends, family, all of those things).

I use Flickr to share my photos with the world, but I keep a local copy of all of my pictures on my local file server and on my laptop and all of the backups I have of that laptop...

Re: Flickr Accidentally Deletes a User's 4,000 Photos and Can't Get Them Back

#37
post #31

I keep hearing about this coming up, yet no one ask talked about why the data is irretrievable. What it implies is that the internal tool(s) that the support staff uses was designed to do deletion instead of status changes. I imagine they have a web interface that fires off some backend script which a) runs sql deletes on an account ID and all tables and b) fires off scripts that physically deletes all photos across…

It's an engineering decision - Flikr has to host a large amount of data for very little cost, since most users aren't paying. Space isn't cheap by the Petabyte! The design for a system where you had multiple redundant copies of all the data and could roll back any changes to the data set is different - and would cost a lot more.

Here is what I don't understand. They have multiple redundant copies in case of unlikely scenario of disaster, but they have no copies or protection in case of quite likely scenario of operator error. This seems backward to me.

EDIT: I don't believe that Yahoo! Flickr does not have a way to recover these things. Or I'm completely wrong.

Re: Flickr Accidentally Deletes a User's 4,000 Photos and Can't Get Them Back

#38
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

anyone know of anything like that for downloading the data locally? backing up data in the cloud to another place in the cloud just seems stupid. i've seen some flickr-specific backup scripts that just dump all of the images to a directory, but they don't preserve titles, dates, sets, collections, tags, etc.

backing up data in the cloud to another place in the cloud just seems stupid Why? The difference between backing up your Flickr data to an encrypted drive at, say, Amazon and backing it up to an encrypted drive under your bed is: Amazon has better physical security, and far better redundancy, because (assuming you use S3) the "drive" you save it on there is actually a replicated data store that spans multiple regions…

i don't want to pay someone else to host a copy of my data when i have perfectly good encrypted backup mechanisms in place. i want offline copies of it to store, look at, modify, copy, etc. whenever i want, and the fewer companies that have access to my private data, the better.

also, many of the reasons backupify.com cites for needing backups would also apply to their own s3-backed service. "hackers", storage failure, human error, TOS violations, accidental account lapse/termination, etc.

Re: Flickr Accidentally Deletes a User's 4,000 Photos and Can't Get Them Back

#39
post #21

What a coincidence. My Flickr pro account expires on Feb. 15 and today I've decided to move away from Flickr and not renew my account. What I've done in the short term is to use FlickrTouchr ( https://github.com/tominsam/flickrtouchr ) to retrieve my ~7 GB of photos from Flickr and upload them to Dropbox. The Dropbox gallery feature works quite well and has the advantage that you can easily backup/modify the underlyi…

>I'd like to move the pictures to my own server (allowing me to use my own domain, etc.) and hack together a simple frontend similar to Dropbox' gallery.

I think Opera's personal browser based server ("Unite") is going to have it's day (or something similar will) - http://www.opera.com/press/releases/2009/06/16/; has a "photo server" built in.

Re: Flickr Accidentally Deletes a User's 4,000 Photos and Can't Get Them Back

#40
post #36

Would someone really trust Yahoo/Flickr to all their images and not have backups? Hopefully they didn't really care much about the images, else they should have copies elsewhere.

Nope, and neither did the photographer that is being written about. What isn't backupable, and thus is lost forever is all of the comments he had on the various pictures, all of the groups his pictures belonged to, all of the embed's of pictures on various sites, all of the social aspect of Flickr (such as friends, family, all of those things). I use Flickr to share my photos with the world, but I keep a local copy o…

Isn't that on google? Or bing, since that's who yahoo uses. That way, you could get back all of the links. It would take some developer time, but that's exactly what's needed for PR.
Post reply on HN