By doubling the hardware, you still do not overcome the potential corruption that could occur with non-ecc memory. If this is truly a mission critical application then it really does not serve much of a purpose to short change yourself with substandard hardware.
-----Original Message-----
From: centos-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:centos-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John R Pierce
Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2011 7:17 PM
To: centos@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: server specifications
On 02/13/11 7:06 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> It's also possible to save the budget, buy *two* similarly powerful
> used systems with much lesser hardware specs, and have genuine
> failover instead of the shared vulnerability of one expensive server
> with high-availability components as you describe. I've done both, and
> encourage using less expensive hardware in pairs: that makes upgrading
> a lot cheaper and helps avoid the single points of failure of high end
> hardware. HP's older "Proliant Server Packs" and their ability to
> completely mishandle the Broadcom network drivers on RHEL and CentOS,
> in particular, come to mind.
you still want ECC memory in a server... and redundant power in a 1U
is really no big deal.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
