[72960] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Quick question.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alexei Roudnev)
Wed Aug 4 01:57:37 2004
From: "Alexei Roudnev" <alex@relcom.net>
To: "Paul Jakma" <paul@clubi.ie>,
"Michel Py" <michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us>
Cc: "Nanog" <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 22:52:03 -0700
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
It is not mad idea - 2 CPU servers are not sugnificantly more expansive as
1CPU (and notice, we count P-IV MMultiThread as 2 CPU) but increases system
redundancy to the run-away processes. Of course, it is not hardware
redundancy, but it REALLY works.
> On Sat, 31 Jul 2004, Michel Py wrote:
>
> > For PCs I install dual Xeons on every production machine for
> > example, even though the CPU power needed for some is a 486;
>
> What a mad idea.
>
> Intel dont do fault-tolerant SMP.
>
> Running SMP will lower your MTBF just by fact that you now have 2
> CPUs. Then there's fact that you're far more likely to hit bugs in OS
> with SMP than uniproc.
>
> SMP for reliability? Unless it's a multi-million zSeries, What a mad
> idea...
>
> > Michel.
>
> regards,
> --
> Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A
> Fortune:
> Q: What's the difference between USL and the Titanic?
> A: The Titanic had a band.
