Am 04.11.2010 17:39, schrieb Markus Benedikt:
I should have gone more into detail - I'm sorry! For clarification: I have several customers with tight connections to the pharmaceutic industry that have to have fully redundant systems for regulatory reasons (FDA/GxP/ISO)- that is why I don't use the typical Atom-CPUed-twin-SATA micro systems the invis concept is actually targeted at. I mainly use HPs DL 385/585s with it's large cached, battery backed SAS and SCSI controllers and at least twin quadcore opterons for redundancy reasons. These setups typically perform better under heavy loads with lots of single apps which can each grab a cpu core and make use of those 7plus disked arrays.
I don't agree with a half working system being worse than a completely out of order one. If 50 people can't do their jobs it's not as hard on a company's budgets as if there were 100 - or all ov them ...
You are absolutely right with your concerns about ease of administration but I'm selling these services ;-)
Maybe a fork each of "invis light" and "invis heavy" should be considered ...
Cheers
Well, now it makes (a bit more) sense. So, for me, we can stop the DB discussion. Jörg -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-invis+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-invis+help@opensuse.org