Re: OpenVMS - When downtime is not an option

P. Sture <paul.sture.nospam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <5dt4enF35qc8vU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
bill@xxxxxxxxxxx (Bill Gunshannon) wrote:

In article <1182356790.811635.277740@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
IanMiller <gxys@xxxxxxx> writes:
I also though it interesting that the non-stop system took longer than
VMS to failover.

The linux platform was the slowest [except for the fish]

Probably because it didn't failover. They just changed the IP address
and re-booted it to take the place of the other system. :-)

Like I said, it was funny. It is so contrived as to be almost absurd.
Like the "bulletproof" one. Let me pick the path of the bullet and I
can shoot a hole in my home built RAID arrays without a hiccup, too.
Or, go back to the original "bulletproof" add, Master Locks. Stood up
to a 30.06 shell but I can open it with the nail file in my pocket.

What cracked me up was seeing everyone wearing white coats. I don't
think I've ever seen a hardware or software type actually wearing a
white coat (in real life - Hollywood doesn't count).

I'm pretty sure Control Data techs of some sort did in the 70s-early 80s.

What video was pretty stupid. All that I could tell was they failed over a
SAN and had machines at both locations. The operating systems were
irrelevant as far as was visible.

hardly interesting or impressive, but I guess a video about a fiber cut,
or electricians cutting power by accident would be too boring.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OpenVMS - When downtime is not an option
    ... bill@xxxxxxxxxxx (Bill Gunshannon) wrote: ... Probably because it didn't failover. ... Or, go back to the original "bulletproof" add, Master Locks. ... This was obviously theatre for the masses. ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: OpenVMS - When downtime is not an option
    ... Very cool video! ... how was failover achieved on the five operating systems? ... I'm assuming not an OS-specific feature? ...
    (comp.os.vms)