HP3000-L Archives

May 2000, Week 3

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Kevin Newman <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Kevin Newman <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 16 May 2000 11:37:58 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (29 lines)
Mark,

It is in the plans, but it will not be too useful until quite some time
has passed.  The first round plan is to make the second controller
available as a fail over controller, so that you don't have to do
anything if the first controller dies.  You still will not be able to use
the second controller as anything but a hot standby for fail over.
Later, they are talking about being able to use the second controller,
and later still being able to balance between them.  I'm not sure of the
schedule, but I think that we are talking years here instead of months.
This would be a good issue to push with HP.  I know that I have been
trying to push them!

Kevin

Mark Landin wrote:

> On Mon, 15 May 2000 09:03:58 -0400, "Costantino, Rocky"
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> [speaking about the AutoRAID 12H]
>
> > NOTE: HP only supports
> >one controller for connectivity to the HP 3000.
>
> Are there plans to remedy this? Does it need to be included in future
> Strategic Interest Surveys? This is a significant shortcoming, both
> from a performance AND a reliability perspective.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2