On Mon, 18 Apr 2016, Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx wrote: > On Sun, 17 Apr 2016 10:47:55 -0400, "Robert P. J. Day" said: > > i figure this is as good a place as any to ask ... is anyone here > > aware of anyone using a linux config and install that, for the > > purposes of reliability or high availability or whatever you want to > > call it, relies on a second, completely independent installation of > > linux on the same hard drive? > > IBM's AIX has for a long time had the concept of an 'alternate boot > volume', which can be another logical volume on the same physical > hard drive. But it's not intended for high-availability, it's for > "if this software upgrade goes pear-shaped I have an easy backout > procedure". And it avoids most of the "you have to keep two > version" issues by providing a tool to copy your *current* system > onto the alternate boot. I'm sure some Linux distros have stolen > the concept. that makes sense -- a *minimal* bootable system for recovery and troubleshooting. but not a fully independent previous install. > Most implementations of "high availability" would see the phrase "on > the same hard drive" and start pointing and laughing at the single > point of failure. trust me, i'm aware of that. :-) perhaps i shouldn't have used the phrase "high availability", this proposal was more for just the ability to back out of a botched or flawed upgrade. rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday ======================================================================== _______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies