From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Mar 18 21:30:06 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EA8616A4CF
	for <freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 18 Mar 2004 21:30:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from santiago.pacific.net.sg (santiago.pacific.net.sg
	[203.120.90.135])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 25C0843D1F
	for <freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org>;
	Thu, 18 Mar 2004 21:30:05 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from oceanare@pacific.net.sg)
Received: (qmail 4795 invoked from network); 19 Mar 2004 05:30:04 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO maxwell6.pacific.net.sg) (203.120.90.212)
  by santiago with SMTP; 19 Mar 2004 05:30:02 -0000
Received: from pacific.net.sg ([210.24.203.19]) by maxwell6.pacific.net.sg
          with ESMTP
          id <20040319053002.ZKUF9972.maxwell6.pacific.net.sg@pacific.net.sg>;
          Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:30:02 +0800
Message-ID: <405A855A.6000807@pacific.net.sg>
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:30:02 +0800
From: Erich Dollansky <oceanare@pacific.net.sg>
Organization: oceanare pte ltd
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
	rv:1.6) Gecko/20040113
X-Accept-Language: en, en-us, de
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Lanny Baron <lnb@FreeBSDsystems.COM>
References: <20040318232348.BE86443D2D@mx1.FreeBSD.org>
	<20040319013145.P44321@gaff.hhhr.ision.net>	 <405A6537.2070607@pacific.net.sg>
	<1079670664.33813.72.camel@panda>	 <405A7B25.8040306@pacific.net.sg>
	<1079673332.33813.79.camel@panda>
In-Reply-To: <1079673332.33813.79.camel@panda>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
cc: "freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org>
cc: Artem Koutchine <matrix@itlegion.ru>
cc: Olaf Hoyer <ohoyer@ohoyer.de>
Subject: Re: Multiprocessor system VS one processor system
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware
	<freebsd-hardware.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hardware>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hardware-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hardware>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hardware-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hardware>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hardware-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 05:30:06 -0000

Hi,

Lanny Baron wrote:

> Hi Erich,
> Yes you are right. A Server Board cannot be changed with the expectation
> that the system to still run.
> 
> But as I said, with real redundancy, as some of our customers do have,
> such that if Server 1 died, Server 2 picks up immediately. The cost of
> which, is substantially less than that of systems such as you imply.
> 
The price is real high but it is still the only way to make sure 
that the interruption is minimal and the data loss is also minimal.

It depends very much on the application. Banks are a typical 
application for systems like this. Who would like that the 
credited amount got lost just because the server failed in that 
moment of time?

They have the money, they can afford it.

Erich