BLU Discuss list archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Discuss] easy clustering of applications
- Subject: [Discuss] easy clustering of applications
- From: richard.pieri at gmail.com (Richard Pieri)
- Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2014 14:42:38 -0400
- In-reply-to: <CAJFsZ=rO=woj5uqwyED-pw8T4cnieik3KWkkRmdAz9Fq7AoP8A@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <6632cf71d55dabb34806494b44349729.squirrel@webmail.ci.net> <5339DF2D.4010400@gmail.com> <dede145ad2cd4d9b8b4a7c4346be9992@CO2PR04MB684.namprd04.prod.outlook.com> <533B335E.3000209@gmail.com> <b21a926a04f44f3b95ab17a94c059241@CO2PR04MB684.namprd04.prod.outlook.com> <CAJFsZ=rO=woj5uqwyED-pw8T4cnieik3KWkkRmdAz9Fq7AoP8A@mail.gmail.com>
Bill Bogstad wrote: > An application that does little IO, has a high memory footprint, > and modifies all of it between IO requests would make for very > expensive checkpointing. Every checkpoint could require transferring > multiple gigabytes of modified RAM. A CPU can dirty RAM way faster > then all but the fastest network connections can transfer it. This may be why most of the examples of vSphere HA clusters that I've seen sport large disk farms. The canonical example is NetApp's continuous availability configuration. -- Rich P.
- References:
- [Discuss] easy clustering of applications
- From: blu at nedharvey.com (Edward Ned Harvey (blu))
- [Discuss] easy clustering of applications
- From: tmetro+blu at gmail.com (Tom Metro)
- [Discuss] easy clustering of applications
- From: blu at nedharvey.com (Edward Ned Harvey (blu))
- [Discuss] easy clustering of applications
- From: bogstad at pobox.com (Bill Bogstad)
- [Discuss] easy clustering of applications
- Prev by Date: [Discuss] SELinux & IPTables
- Next by Date: [Discuss] Unsubscribe
- Previous by thread: [Discuss] easy clustering of applications
- Next by thread: [Discuss] Redundant array of inexpensive servers: clustering?
- Index(es):
