On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:32:37 +1000 (EST)
"redhat@xxxxxxxxxxx" <redhat@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> You have another computer, which, I presume, is exactly the same as the 'live' one ?
In this application, I have five computers. Four of them are in use, running
24/7, doing four different jobs ranging from running a webserver to answering
the phone to creating plates for a printing press.
The fifth one is going to spend most of its life switched off, sitting in the
corner, ready to swap in for any one of the other four machines.
> I'd still bet my money on the the fact that you'd spend more time rooting around with installation, backups and restores than if you setup software mirroring and used virtualization.
> How does this compare to your solution with regards to complexity and system
availability ?
Unless I'm missing something (which is highly likely) I still don't see how
that would get me where I'm going. I don't need to have a "second copy" of
anything running, until the "main machine" quits. I'll be quite happy to have
the spare machine gathering dust in the corner, as long as I know it's ready to
boot up and "assume the position" if it's needed.
--
MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Melville Sask ~ http://www.melvilletheatre.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
