Seem some people have never heard of "keep it simple, stupid" or "less is more" ... sounds like a few people here are falsely propping up their worth to their employers, making unnecessary BS to justify their own existence.
My experience of over 20 years of this industry easily shows that those who try to make complex networks _always_ have far higher fail rates than those that keep it simple, nearly never have any problems, and when they do its because the powers failed, the gennies didnt kick in and UPS's died before engineers got the gennies going. I've also seen most networks that use SAN's have a far more problems than those using NAS's - providing you use decent NAS gear like EMC or Netapp :) Don't evne think about using a general server as a NAS. On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 10:46 +0100, J E Lyon wrote: > On 9 Jul 2012, at 10:41, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > > Many people just want to be proud, or want to make things expensive so > > their clients are proud. but not always it's like that. > > You go on a bit about "pride in complexity" . . What you fail to understand > is that many highly intelligent, experienced, very able engineers build > systems that are as complex and as large as they _need to be_ and just > because you don't deal with such large systems doesn't make everyone else > wrong. (Okay, I know, some people are proud, and some people do make bad > decisions about large complex systems -- but you make the mistake of assuming > everyone does.) > > Just my 0.02 -- hope it helps. >
<<attachment: face-smile.png>>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
