we are not talking about foundry or alteon (unless they have models with hard
disk options). we are talking about arrowpoint and the software based solutions
like f5. with those vendors and with their models that support dual
powersupplies, the cost of additional powersupplies and replacing the hard
disks with solid-state devices is high, to the point where it would have made
sense to just purchase two devices from the beginning. take a look at an
11800 from Cisco. Throw in dual power supplies, redundant managment cards and
ethernet blades and you'll have spent a huge portion of what it would have
cost to just purchase two 11800 chasis with one of everything in each. plus
instead of 8 minutes of downtime when failing over, you'll have a time
measured in seconds.
i was incorrect in saying it would cost the "same". It's more like 75% of the
cost of getting a pair of LB's
On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 11:06:57AM -0800 Titus, Tim decided to say:
> Huh? If you buy one hardware load balancer (Alteon, Arrowpoint, Foundry)
> and get a redundant power supply, it shouldn't cost as much as two?
> I think I'm confused by your response.
> -Tim Titus------------------------
> Director, Internet Operations, CCC
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arthur Thomas [mailto:arthurIZZATsitesmith.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2000 11:14 AM
> To: lb-lIZZATvegan.net
> Subject: Re: [load balancing] keeping load balancers separate
> > If you can
> > get rid of the hard disks (because you have a solid-state device), and put
> > redundant power supplies together (the second most-likely component to
> > fail), you should be well on your way to having a very stable system.
> yea but it will cost you the same as it would have if you just purchased two
> balancers from the start
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Nov 05 2000 - 15:09:08 EST