linux-kernel - Re: [ANNOUNCE] Ramback: faster than a speeding bullet

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <200803161348.48561.phillips@phunq.net>
Date:	Sun, 16 Mar 2008 12:48:47 -0800
From:	Daniel Phillips <phillips@...nq.net>
To:	David Newall <davidn@...idnewall.com>
Cc:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Ramback: faster than a speeding bullet

On Saturday 15 March 2008 22:42, David Newall wrote:
> Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > That is why I keep recommending that a ramback setup be replicated or
> > mirrored, which people in this thread keep glossing over.  When
> > replicated or mirrored, you still get the microsecond-level transaction
> > times, and you get the safety too.
> 
> Do you mean it should be replicated with a second ramback?  That would
> be pretty pointless, since all failure modes would affect both.  It's
> not like one ramback will survive a crash when the other doesn't.

A second machine running a second ramback, on a second UPS pair.
I thought that was obvious.

Daniel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/