Eric Shubert wrote:
> Nice piece, Ben. I might add that with a reduction in hardware comes an
> increase in reliability.
To some degree, anyway... In N+1 clustering solutions, more hardware
leads to better stability. I once had two servers with mission-critical
services on them both throw hard drive fits one night(they had 2x scsi
drives, but not RAIDED as we were using one exclusively for mail queue
IO), so I simply limped them along long enough to drain their queues and
halted them, dealing with them the next afternoon...
> I worked on a server some time ago that had SCSI drives which had a MTBF
> of 36 years. The server had 72 of them. One failed every 6 months, like
> clockwork.
I had a RAID under my control that had not been powered down in 5 years.
When we finally did, half the drives did not spin back up :)
--
Ben Browning <benb@bensbrowning.com>
Linux Systems Architect and Administrator
http://www.bensbrowning.com/
begin:vcard
fn:Ben S Browning
n:Browning;Ben S
adr:;;;Tempe;AZ;85282;United States of America
email;internet:
benb@bensbrowning.com
tel;cell:(602)206-8203
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:
http://www.bensbrowning.com/
version:2.1
end:vcard
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)
