From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Sep 12 04:57:06 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id EAA27764 for questions-outgoing; Fri, 12 Sep 1997 04:57:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dumbwinter.ecomotor.it (mod5.logic.it [195.120.151.21] (may be forged)) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id EAA27759 for ; Fri, 12 Sep 1997 04:56:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 742 invoked by uid 1000); 12 Sep 1997 11:56:37 -0000 Date: Fri, 12 Sep 1997 13:56:36 +0200 (MET DST) From: Marco Molteni X-Sender: molter@dumbwinter.ecomotor.it To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Clustering/fail-over capability? In-Reply-To: <199709111913.OAA07761@news.cioe.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Thu, 11 Sep 1997, Steven Ames wrote: > > Mirroring disks is pretty easy to do, the built-in disk striping > > driver (ccd) does this already. But the rest is pretty tricky. > > But in this case you'd really want to be mirroring the disks > across servers, not within the same server. ccd can't do that. I agree. Ccd can help with mirroring, not with clustering. > I believe that 'clustering' is going to become a more important > topic in the near future. Having fail over and load balanced > servers is desired for larger 'mission critical' applications. Exactly. As far as I know, Digital has the best know-how in clustering, with the VAX VMS operating system. I think they added a sort of clustering capability to their Unix. (They also added clustering to NT, but *we* are talking about serious OSes, I suppose ;-) Marco Molteni Computer Science student at the Universita' degli studi di Milano, Italy. UNIX _is_ user friendly. It's just selective about who its friends are.