On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 00:46, Richard Elling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Adam Leventhal wrote: >> >> On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 10:48:25PM +0100, Mattias Pantzare wrote: >> >>> >>> That is _not_ active-active, that is active-passive. >>> >>> If you have a active-active system I can access the same data via both >>> controllers at the same time. I can't if it works like you just >>> described. You can't call it active-active just because different >>> volumes are controlled by different controllers. Most active-passive >>> RAID controllers can do that. >>> >>> The data sheet talks about active-active clusters, how does that work? >>> >> >> What the Sun Storage 7000 Series does would more accurately be described >> as >> dual active-passive. >> > > This is ambiguous in the cluster market. It is common to describe > HA clusters where each node can be offering services concurrently, > as active/active, even though the services themselves are active/passive. > This is to appease folks who feel that idle secondary servers are a bad > thing.
But this product is not in the cluster market. It is in the storage market. By your definition virtually all dual controller RAID boxes are active/active. You should talk to Veritas so that they can change all their documentation... Active/active and active/passive has a real technical meaning, don't let marketing destroy that! _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
