On Jul 6, 2004, at 2:48 AM, Crucificator wrote:
Dear Jason, most NA are probably giggling at your comment. I currently administer such a server wich serves tunneled dynamic HTTP for SQL for 42 locations country-wide. We DO NOT have redundant servers. Have you heard of RAID solutions? And it saves bandwidth, time and money as well. I believe the lack of experience lies elsewere...
I don't wish to continue a pissing contest, only to correct the flow of misinformation.
Are you suggesting that RAID is _the_ answer to HA+ solutions? I work with fully dynamic failover designs utilizing clustering software (Veritas VCS, RAC, BitKeeper, etc), multipath software, clustered hardware (redundant SAN switches/controllers), etc. RAID does not fulfill the role of any of these components, nor was it designed to. It is an integral part of a solid HA+ design, but only one small part of the overall schematic.
Secure transmission features, like those I mentioned earlier, are also integral to designs where the data store must be kept separate from the HTTP server (say, any e-commerce site). If this type of feature wasn't needed, I doubt the MySQL folks would've bothered to put it in.
-- Jason Dixon, RHCE DixonGroup Consulting http://www.dixongroup.net
-- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
