RE: Is Linux FailSafe Actively Maintained?
David Brower <[email protected]> Thu, 13 Nov 2003 13:01:57 -0800
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.failsafe |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
[email protected] wrote: > Message: 1 > From: Robert Meiners <[email protected]> > Organization: GONICUS GmbH > To: [email protected] > Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:27:34 +0100 > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: [LinuxFailSafe] RE: Is Linux FailSafe Actively Maintained? > > =2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Okay, > > the developers said, that the aktive development is stopped. > But they also said, that the current version is running. > However, another solution would be kimberlite. > We realized some projects in combination with oracle. > But by this System you are bounded on two nodes > and you need a shared storage with a simulanious access, e. g. a RAID-Array. > > Greetings=20 For the original question, shared storage was going to be needed anyway, because the application was an Oracle failover. The database being failed over has state that needs to be accessible from storage. Once there is shared storage, an Oracle user might find it more effective to run the Oracle RAC flavor of the database, which lets you use all the nodes of a cluster at the same time rather than one at a time as in a failover environment. -dB