On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, Traitel, Eyal wrote:
- We sell active-active clustering, so both nodes are active, and customer
is not wasting his money for any passive protection.
I didn't mean to imply a passive failover, just an "unbalanced" one. For a long time, I managed an F740 and an F760 and would probably have clustered them if I could have. But, I had to wait until it was justified first for more power by upgrading the F740, and then later to get clustering as the last step.
It leads you to the point that it may not worth the complexity to sell such a setup.
Agreed, and I suspect this is a major reason why it isn't done. In my F740/F760 situation, it would have been bad to have a less sophisticated customer expect his F740 could handle being a partner to an F760. In my case, both were very busy, and to have more than 2x the load on that poor F740 would have been unacceptable...in normal operations. But, it would have been worth an acceptable risk for a degraded mode like this, with the reward being less downtime. Sluggish performance for an hour is usually better than zero performance for an hour. ;)
I think it's a nice-to-have, but not worth jumping up and down about.
Until next time...
The Mathworks, Inc. 508-647-7000 x7792 3 Apple Hill Drive, Natick, MA 01760-2098 508-647-7001 FAX tmerrill@mathworks.com http://www.mathworks.com ---