Re: Windoze not rebooted monthly shuts down airports!
From: JF Mezei (jfmezei.spamnot_at_teksavvy.com)
Date: 09/22/04
- Previous message: Joshua Lehrer: "Re: Does anyone use Compaq C++ V6.5 on Alpha seriously with STL?"
- In reply to: David Froble: "Re: Windoze not rebooted monthly shuts down airports!"
- Next in thread: Bob Koehler: "Re: Windoze not rebooted monthly shuts down airports!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 00:22:56 -0400
David Froble wrote:
> I've also got to disagree with this conclusion. It's not cluster communications
> that would be the issue. If part of a cluster goes away, fine, as long as all
> users have access to the part of the cluster that remains available.
Perhaps Patrick Moreau can chip in.
I think one has to take a more global look at an ATC application, which
includes workstations as well as the connection between a workstation and the
server infrastructure. Availability becomes an interesting issue.
There is an interesting transactional nature between regions, when a flight
gets transfered from one regional centre to another. It isn't enough to just
tell the new centre is it now handling that flight, but there would also be
collision detection issues to ensure that two flights in adjoining regions
wouldn't enter a 3rd region on a collision course.
But inside the region, it isn't so much a transactional system as a data
acquisition and processing to generate vectors and detect collision etc.
> With enough shadow sets, or however storage would be set up, all data should
> remain available to whatever part of the cluster remains available.
But you are also more likely to see global sections that contain the live data.
> I'm not real knowledgable about running a cluster, so I'm sure there are others
> who could provide solutions for the problems.
Thing is that one should NOT view VMS clusters as the solution to ATC
problems. We should view the services provided by VMS clustering as tools that
would allow such an application to be architected in a very elegant way. The
application would be far more important than the OS in that case.
> I'm not sure why 96 nodes wouldn't be enough.
> don't know the requirements so I'm just speculating, but I have to wonder just
> how many GS1280 systems would be required.
Whether you have standalone systems or galaxies/wildfires really depends on
the application architecture.
- Previous message: Joshua Lehrer: "Re: Does anyone use Compaq C++ V6.5 on Alpha seriously with STL?"
- In reply to: David Froble: "Re: Windoze not rebooted monthly shuts down airports!"
- Next in thread: Bob Koehler: "Re: Windoze not rebooted monthly shuts down airports!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|