joa...@swbell.net (John McKown) writes:
> IBM once owned the Stratus line, a competitor to Tandem, and called it
> the System/88.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratus_Technologies

minor nit *not owned* ... provided enormous amount of money to rebrand &
sell as system/88. there is some folklore regarding just how many
system/88s were actually installed ... about how some marketing teams
would go in after IBM was bringing along a prospect and offer them an
un-rebranded flavor at lower price.

i marketed ha/cmp against both system/88 and stratus in much of the
system/88 period ... past posts mentioning ha/cmp
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#hacmp

part of the marketing at the time was that stratus (and system/88) was
purely fault-tolerant hardware .. but required scheduled system downtime
and reboot for many times of software maintanance. For some customers
with 5-nines availability requirement ... a century of outage budget
could be blown with each annual maintenance scheduled outage.

ha/cmp didn't have equivalent individual system uptime ... but lots of
environments, clustered operation masked any single system outage
... providing overall cluster availability much better than
5-nines. Individual scheduled system maintenance could be done with
rolling outage of individual cluster members. Stratus responded they
could configure for cluster operation ... but that negated the need (and
expense) for real fault tolerant hardware (in all those scenarios that I
was able to demonstrate clustered fault masking & recovery).

Somewhat as a result, I got asked to do a section in the corporate
continuous availability strategy document ... but after both Rochester
(as/400) and POK (mainframe) whined that they couldn't meet the
objectives, my section was pulled.

-- 
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to