Alistair,
you ever had one of the processors inyour (very expensive) Stratus
machine fail? I had, and i still remember the screaming users whose
processes were running on that particular processor. 100% redundancy is
NOT 100% uptime. Read the thread about scalability and failover on K12osn
list, especially the latest from Eric Harrison. There is the light at the
end of the tunnel. And if you really need 100% redundancy and hogh
availability, how about a couple of IBM Z390 mainframes, running rh linux,
of course? julius
On Tue, 4 Feb 2003, Alistair Moir wrote:
> I'm investingating LTSP and have some questions regarding duplicating
> servers to ensure uptime. This is not isolated to LTSP but as we're
> looking at LTSP it would make sense to ask here.
>
> What I want is 100% redundancy. Similar to the old Stratus machines
> where you could remove replace CPUs and memory on the fly. x86 servers
> do not support this so I need to cluster.
>
> If I have a cluster of say ten nodes and one of the nodes fails I want
> a seemless transition to the other nodes, my users should not lose
> uptime due to a node failing. I'm aware performance may degrade but
> that should be all.
>
> I took a brief look at Moisx but that seemed more set towards
> distirbuting the load rather than providing uptime, in fact they seemed
> willng to sacrafice uptime to gain load dispersal. Obviously correct
> me if I'm wrong.
>
> The question is does anybody have a solution for this hard or soft?
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
_____________________________________________________________________
Ltsp-discuss mailing list. To un-subscribe, or change prefs, goto:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltsp-discuss
For additional LTSP help, try #ltsp channel on irc.freenode.net
