[Beowulf] HPC and SAN
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Michael Will mwill at penguincomputing.comWed Dec 29 09:05:56 PST 2004
- Previous message: [Beowulf] HPC and SAN
- Next message: [Beowulf] looking for a switch to purchase
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Wednesday 29 December 2004 01:11 am, Leif Nixon wrote: > Guy Coates <gmpc at sanger.ac.uk> writes: > > > The only time SAN attached storage helps is in the case of storage node > > failures, as you have redundant paths between storage nodes and disks. > > And the added complexity of a fail-over mechanism might well lower > your total MTBF. Speaking from experience? The expectation when building a fail-over system is that the systems mtb-total-f is higher even though the mtb-partial-f is shorter (more parts that can fail). Of course the probability, that the failover logic / software is the new single-point-of-failure, is not zero either. Michael -- Michael Will, Linux Sales Engineer NEWS: We have moved to a larger iceberg :-) NEWS: 300 California St., San Francisco, CA. Tel: 415-954-2822 Toll Free: 888-PENGUIN Fax: 415-954-2899 www.penguincomputing.com
- Previous message: [Beowulf] HPC and SAN
- Next message: [Beowulf] looking for a switch to purchase
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list