Alex Peshkov wrote:

>
>
> Erik LaBianca:
>> A superserver system will never be able
>> to continue serving requests through a hardware failure, whereas classic
>> operating on a cluster could do so.
>>
>
> Sorry, Erik, but it does. A number of clients of our company use SS
> fail-resistant clusters for last 4 years. Even without expensive shared
> storage.
>

How? Shadow databases on NFS? With that architecture you'll still have
to delegate a master database to receive all write traffic and
communicate it to the clients... I've certainly not seen any such
solution documented...

--erik



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]