On Thu, 2003-07-10 at 10:16, Bob Bell wrote: > On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 06:56:51AM -0400, Brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think many sites consider downtime to just be part of life for > > That's pretty stupid if they do. Clustering technologies should let > you avoid this.
Not every site, even large ones, are worried about 101% uptime. Clusters are a great solution, but they do also require more investment, and more maintenance and staff expertise. It is simply not worth it to everyone. > appropriate. Sites willing to pay for this sort of technology really And I think the "willing to pay" part is key. We've put put temp "work in progress" type pages up for customers, generally a courtesy. Few are willing to pay even for this, much less for a clustering solution. My original point was that while there ARE solutions available to minimize downtime to practically zero, for 95% of the sites out there it's really not an issue worth pursuing. Have a good backup handy, some spare hardware, and a decent MOP and you shouldn't have any issues... -- Brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss