--- Steve Underwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
WipeOut wrote:
Granted five 9's is never easy but in a cluster of 10+ servers the
system should survive just about anything short of an act of God..
You do realise that is a real dumb statement, don't you? :-)
A cluster of 10 machines,
Hi,
I don't want to drag this into a long thread, but note the original says
the system should survive just about anything short of an act of God,
and suddenly you are talking about a reliable server and a few switches.
These are quite different things. I have yet to see a 5 x 9's server
WipeOut wrote:
Granted five 9's is never easy but in a cluster of 10+ servers the
system should survive just about anything short of an act of God..
You do realise that is a real dumb statement, don't you? :-)
A cluster of 10 machines, each on a different site. Guarantees from the
power
On Fri, 2004-01-09 at 21:36, Steve Underwood wrote:
WipeOut wrote:
Granted five 9's is never easy but in a cluster of 10+ servers the
system should survive just about anything short of an act of God..
You do realise that is a real dumb statement, don't you? :-)
A cluster of 10
On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 07:38:16PM +, WipeOut wrote:
Also a failover system would typically only be 2 servers, if there were
a cluster system there could be 10 servers in which case five 9's should
be easy..
Err, no. five 9s is *never* easy.
Does your telco provide you with SLAs that
Nicolas Bougues wrote:
On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 07:38:16PM +, WipeOut wrote:
Also a failover system would typically only be 2 servers, if there were
a cluster system there could be 10 servers in which case five 9's should
be easy..
Err, no. five 9s is *never* easy.
Does your telco
Does your telco provide you with SLAs that make five 9s reasonable at
all ?
LOL... Our telco services could be down for several hours at a time.
We found than most US Broadband carriers (DSL and Cable) offer a
best effort zero SLA service. If you are using broadband as a primary
transport,
Using another load-balancing box (F5 or whatever) only moves the problem
to that box. Duplicating it, moves the problem to another box, until
the costs exponentially grow beyond the initial intended value of the
solution. The weak points become lots of other boxes and infrastructure,
Hi Richard,
Load balancers have some added value, but those that have had to deal
with a problem where a single system within the cluster is up but not
processing data would probably argue their actual value.
I've done quite a lot of work with clustered/ha linux configurations. I
usualy try to
I would set the Enterprise Class bar at five 9's reliability
(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
design considerations in both hardware and software.
In our network, Linux is approaching
Enterprise Class and I don't see why
I would set the Enterprise Class bar at five 9's reliability
(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
design considerations in both hardware and software.
My Norstar Meridian system has nowhere near this. We get about 5
Doug Shubert wrote:
I would set the Enterprise Class bar at five 9's reliability
(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
design considerations in both hardware and software.
In our network, Linux is approaching
Enterprise Class
Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
I would set the Enterprise Class bar at five 9's reliability
(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
design considerations in both hardware and software.
To turn around, let's discuss what we need to
I would set the Enterprise Class bar at five 9's reliability
(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
design considerations in both hardware and software.
In our network, Linux is approaching
Enterprise Class and I don't
On Sun, 2004-01-04 at 10:14, Doug Shubert wrote:
I would set the Enterprise Class bar at five 9's reliability
(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
design considerations in both hardware and software.
In our network,
Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
I would set the Enterprise Class bar at five 9's reliability
(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
design considerations in both hardware and software.
To turn around, let's discuss what we
Steven Critchfield wrote:
On Sun, 2004-01-04 at 10:14, Doug Shubert wrote:
I would set the Enterprise Class bar at five 9's reliability
(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
design considerations in both hardware and
Rich Adamson wrote:
Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
I would set the Enterprise Class bar at five 9's reliability
(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
design considerations in both hardware and software.
To turn around,
Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
I would set the Enterprise Class bar at five 9's reliability
(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
design considerations in both hardware and software.
To turn around, let's discuss what we need to
On Sun, 2004-01-04 at 13:28, WipeOut wrote:
Steven Critchfield wrote:
On Sun, 2004-01-04 at 10:14, Doug Shubert wrote:
I would set the Enterprise Class bar at five 9's reliability
(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require
Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
I would set the Enterprise Class bar at five 9's reliability
(about 5.25 minutes per year of down time) the same
as a Class 4/5 phone switch. This would require redundant
design considerations in both hardware and software.
To turn around, let's discuss what we need to
I'd guess part of the five-9's discussion centers around how automated
must one be to be able to actually get close? If one assumes the loss
of a SIMM the answer/effort certainly is different then assuming the
loss of a single interface card (when multiples exist), etc.
I would doubt
1. Moving a physical interface (whether a T1, ethernet or 2-wire pstn) is
mostly trevial, however what signal is needed to detect a system failure
and move the physical connection to a second machine/interface? (If there
are three systems in a cluster, what signal is needed? If a three-way
The comments below are certainly not intended as any form of negativism,
but rather to pursue thought processes for redundant systems.
1. Moving a physical interface (whether a T1, ethernet or 2-wire pstn) is
mostly trivial, however what signal is needed to detect a system failure
and move
24 matches
Mail list logo
