From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jul 15 16:13:24 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 823831065677;
	Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:13:24 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from petefrench@ticketswitch.com)
Received: from constantine.ticketswitch.com (constantine.ticketswitch.com
	[IPv6:2002:57e0:1d4e:1::3])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4219F8FC15;
	Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:13:24 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from petefrench@ticketswitch.com)
Received: from dilbert.rattatosk ([10.64.50.6] helo=dilbert.ticketswitch.com)
	by constantine.ticketswitch.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
	(Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <petefrench@ticketswitch.com>)
	id 1KIn9W-000EJL-W1; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:13:22 +0100
Received: from petefrench by dilbert.ticketswitch.com with local (Exim 4.69
	(FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <petefrench@ticketswitch.com>)
	id 1KIn9W-000HQK-V3; Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:13:22 +0100
To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG, koitsu@FreeBSD.ORG, sven@dmv.com
In-Reply-To: <200807151556.m6FFuGan045657@lurza.secnetix.de>
Message-Id: <E1KIn9W-000HQK-V3@dilbert.ticketswitch.com>
From: Pete French <petefrench@ticketswitch.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:13:22 +0100
Cc: 
Subject: Re: Multi-machine mirroring choices
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:13:24 -0000

> You install a filer cluster with two nodes.  Then there is
> no single point of failure.

Yes, that would be my choice too. Unfortunately it didn't get
done that way. Mind you, the solution we do have is something
I am actually pretty happy with - it's cheap and does the job.
We never wanted 100% uuptime after all, just something so I
could get stuff back up and running in about 15 minutes with no
loss of data if possible.

Woiuld have been nice to get to play with the NetApp stuff though.

-pete.