John O'Gorman wrote: > If the business (like for example insurance) acquires lots of data > continually then the cost of downtime due to a disc failure is huge > compared with the extra dollars for RAID with Hotswap.
True. In most cases though the consequences of downtime might not be so apparent. That is the trouble. Once you start counting everything from delayed work of the users to the time of the admin better spend on productive work instead of repairing a miserable machine and many more things like your reputation if clients have to call for you notice that a machine broke down again, costs for downtime become prohibitive even for small companies. > With hardware RAID5, if the yellow light comes on a HDD, you simply > remove the bad disk, plug in the replacement, and watch for the new > disc's lights to settle while it syncs up. Eventually the light goes out > and flashes green only when the system flushes its buffers. During all > this time the users keep working productively -- it's simply wonderful! > > No question in my mind that it is a Good Thing. True again. All my systems are set up to complain if something is seriously wrong. In earlier times I could simply log in to the servers every day to check the logs and have a look at the machine. Now I prefer to have all servers report via email if some trouble occurs, either ServerView for the FSC machines or some scripts for the remaining noname machines. Too many servers and services to do it manually anymore. -- Sandy List replies only please! Please address PMs to: news-reply2 (@) japantest (.) homelinux (.) com -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
