From owner-freebsd-cluster Fri Aug 18 1:41: 2 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-cluster@freebsd.org Received: from lucifer.ninth-circle.org (lucifer.bart.nl [194.158.168.74]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1CCD37B422 for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 01:41:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from asmodai@localhost) by lucifer.ninth-circle.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA85049; Fri, 18 Aug 2000 10:40:56 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from asmodai) Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 10:40:56 +0200 From: Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven To: Ronald G Minnich Cc: "freebsd-cluster@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: Is this list active? Message-ID: <20000818104056.A84928@lucifer.bart.nl> References: <200008062041.QAA21285@sanson.reyes.somos.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: ; from rminnich@lanl.gov on Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 03:13:26PM -0600 Organisation: VIA Net.Works The Netherlands Sender: owner-freebsd-cluster@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG -On [20000806 23:15], Ronald G Minnich (rminnich@lanl.gov) wrote: >it's not real active, though we wish it were ... *nod* The problem is that both Eivind Eklund and me got sidetracked with other things which caused, at least for me, some lack of time for clustering. However, I am still looking at this, but my experience on clustering doesn't in the distance even match Eivind's. Just a curious question, I guess a keep alive type of system where a daemon per host sends out and acks keep alive messages is the easiest form of high availability, right? -- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven Network- and systemadministrator VIA Net.Works The Netherlands BSD: Technical excellence at its best http://www.via-net-works.nl Truth is always exciting. Speak it, then. Life is boring without it... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-cluster" in the body of the message