Oh - and I forgot... UI was _much_ nicer last time I looked. And nowhere near as buggy as the HB GUI.
Yan Fitterer wrote: > NCS has better integration with EVMS, and has data-network heartbeat. It > does not therefore require STONITH. > > It has had much more testing than HB for large clusters as well. 20+ > node clusters are not uncommon. > > Yan > > Sander van Vugt wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Just like to know your opinion about the following. A pure Linux shop >> would of course definitely go for Heartbeat as the solution for high >> availability. However, in an environment that comes from Novell's >> NetWare, Novell Cluster Services (NCS) would be the best choice, >> especially if running OESv1 that runs on top of SUSE Linux Enterprise >> Server (SLES) 9. Now in the upcoming Open Enterprise Server 2, which >> runs on top of SLES 10, it appears that customers do have a choice >> between Heartbeat from the SLES stack, or NCS from the OES stack. Does >> anyone have thoughts about that? For example, when clustering something >> like Novell GroupWise in a shop that wants to implement OESv2 later this >> year, to me personally, Heartbeat seems the better choice, since it has >> much more features. What I'd like to know, is there any particular >> reason why in the upcoming OESv2 one would still choose NCS? (Except for >> backward compatibility of course) >> >> Thanks, >> Sander >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Linux-HA mailing list >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha >> See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems > _______________________________________________ > Linux-HA mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha > See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems