Clustering: switches reliability/redundancy
- From: JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 15:43:45 -0500
In the very old days, one depended on the AUI to Thickwire device for
each node. Failure would break the connection of one node and possibly
jeoperdize quorum.
Then came thinwire which was totally inert and as long as nobody touched
the wire, it was not a point of failure.
(although many would argue otherwise in practice, but in theory there
was nothing to fail).
Then comes along twister pair with the hub and later switches. Hubs and
switches are powered.
Are there considerations if a cluster nodes are all connected via the
same switch/hub ? It the later fails, the whole cluster hangs and
becomes inaccessible.
Are hubs/switches considered "fault tolerant" ? If not, what possible
steps would a good site planner take to ensure a cluster isn't
jeoperdized by some $50 switch/hub ?
Are hubs considered more "fault tolerant" than switches ?
Is it just a simple case of reserving spare ports on a backup switch so
that cluster ethernet connectiosn can be moved one by one before the
main switch/hub is powered off for maintenance etc ?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Clustering: switches reliability/redundancy
- From: prep
- Re: Clustering: switches reliability/redundancy
- From: Baldrick
- Re: Clustering: switches reliability/redundancy
- From: Peter 'EPLAN' LANGSTOEGER
- Re: Clustering: switches reliability/redundancy
- Prev by Date: Re: Resale value of ES40 and lots of other VMS systems
- Next by Date: Re: ES40 RAID: Mylex KZPAC ?
- Previous by thread: Storageworks shelves
- Next by thread: Re: Clustering: switches reliability/redundancy
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|