Adam Leventhal wrote: > On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 10:48:25PM +0100, Mattias Pantzare wrote: > >> That is _not_ active-active, that is active-passive. >> >> If you have a active-active system I can access the same data via both >> controllers at the same time. I can't if it works like you just >> described. You can't call it active-active just because different >> volumes are controlled by different controllers. Most active-passive >> RAID controllers can do that. >> >> The data sheet talks about active-active clusters, how does that work? >> > > What the Sun Storage 7000 Series does would more accurately be described as > dual active-passive. >
This is ambiguous in the cluster market. It is common to describe HA clusters where each node can be offering services concurrently, as active/active, even though the services themselves are active/passive. This is to appease folks who feel that idle secondary servers are a bad thing. For services which you may think as "active on all nodes providing the exact same view of the data and service" we usually use the terms "scalable service," "parallel database," or "cluster file system." -- richard _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
