I once worked for one of the big high tech companies and did solutions design for various sized enterprises. Even a simple failover system is more than 2x the cost of a non-failover system. Although most clients said they wanted highly available clustered systems, it's only the really big customers who are doing thousands of transactions a minute where the costs of being down is substantially greater than the cost of the failover system that bought them.
On Wednesday, January 9, 2013 8:51:43 AM UTC-8, CrankyPants wrote: > > Other websites you visit probably don't contain this much data and custom > code. And those that do have a whole lot more money behind them. > > I do wonder why they don't run a hot-hot failover cluster and outfit the > secondary node with slower disk/older equipment. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BGG Down" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/bgg_down/-/f-xCJqx5lFoJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bgg_down?hl=en.
