Quote:
Originally Posted by BigV
I have been tasked
|
You do realize that in modern corporate-speak, "tasked" is synonymous with "bent over and fucked hard, with no lubricant," right? Just sayin'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigV
Redundant systems so that there is no single point of failure, including the server itself
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigV
I don't want a colo for this. This is strictly in house equipment.
|
This whole project is out of my league, but these last two statements may be contradictory. If you really are looking at 100% up-time, then you really need to consider a failover mirror at a remote location.
I would suggest googling around for some of the recent stuff about disk reliability that Google has come up with in running their own data centers. (It's too late on Friday for me to find primary cites myself.) I believe the bottom line is they're starting to come to the conclusion that it's more reliable to buy dirt cheap systems and mirror the hell out of them (I'm talking 3 or 4 mirrors here) rather than put a shitload of money into some fancy-pants SAN that becomes a single point of failure. But again, this is out of my league.
You said nothing about networking or bandwidth requirements... what's the prognosis for a server that's up and running, and the network switch it's connected to barfs?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad
At my workplace we do the big DB stuff with Oracle on HP running Linux.
|
I'm not even going to touch the one about "no single point of failure" and "Windows OS"!
