Martin Bouzek said:
> Hello all,
>
> our company needs to setup an high availability cluster on
> two machines running SCO Open Server and Informix. Does anybody have
> any experience with such configuration or at least can anybody point me
> where to find more information about supported HW minimal versions etc?

Aha! Aha! Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah a!

Perhaps you should rather look at Informix's built in High-availability
Data Replication (HDR)...

--

Bye now,
Obnoxio

"C'est pas parce qu'on n'a rien à dire qu'il faut fermer sa gueule"
- Coluche

"I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't get my head up my ass"
- JCH

"Ogni uomo mi guarda come se fossi una testa di cazzo"
- Marco

I went to the airport to check in and they asked what I did because I
looked like a terrorist. I said I was a comedian. They said, "Say
something funny then." I told them I had just graduated from flying
school.

-- Ahmed Ahmed
sending to informix-list

Obnoxio The Chav wrote:
> Martin Bouzek said:
>
>>Hello all,
>>
>> our company needs to setup an high availability cluster on
>>two machines running SCO Open Server and Informix. Does anybody have
>>any experience with such configuration or at least can anybody point me
>>where to find more information about supported HW minimal versions etc?
>
>
> Aha! Aha! Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah a!
>
> Perhaps you should rather look at Informix's built in High-availability
> Data Replication (HDR)...
>
More to the point, why run SCO?

Not to spread FUD, but check out the financials of SCO....
In light of their failing attempt of suing IBM etc ... they don't have
the financials to succeed.

My sugestion is to look at Novell re SuSE for a better and more
sustainable solution.

And yeah, as the clown points out... You're focusing on HW/OS redundancy
for HA. You should look at HDR within Informix. Truly still one of the
best in industry. ;-)

But hey, what do I know? I'm just a nobody. ;-)

Ciao!

On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 07:29:16 -0600, nobody wrote:

>
>
> Obnoxio The Chav wrote:
>> Martin Bouzek said:
>>
>>>Hello all,
>>>
>>> our company needs to setup an high availability cluster on
>>>two machines running SCO Open Server and Informix. Does anybody have
>>>any experience with such configuration or at least can anybody point me
>>>where to find more information about supported HW minimal versions etc?
>>
>>
>> Aha! Aha! Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah a!
>>
>> Perhaps you should rather look at Informix's built in High-availability
>> Data Replication (HDR)...
>>
> More to the point, why run SCO?
>
> Not to spread FUD, but check out the financials of SCO....
> In light of their failing attempt of suing IBM etc ... they don't have
> the financials to succeed.
>
> My sugestion is to look at Novell re SuSE for a better and more
> sustainable solution.
>
> And yeah, as the clown points out... You're focusing on HW/OS redundancy
> for HA. You should look at HDR within Informix. Truly still one of the
> best in industry. ;-)
>
> But hey, what do I know? I'm just a nobody. ;-)
>
> Ciao!

Well, the whole point is that we have some rather old product which was
once written in SCO/Informix. One customer wants to upgrade his
installation and have a backup server. We would like to do it with
minimal modifications of existing programs as they are not further
developed. The HA cluster seems to us as the best solution (but there can
be the better one which just didn't occured to us). If we would be
developing something anew we surely wouldn't even consider the SCO Open
Server.

With the HDR we are afraid it would be problematic to synchronize primary
and secondary server once one of them broke down (HW problem etc.) without
necessity to stop the valid one. Is there any reliable and reasonably
complicated way how to duplicate db while data in it are modified during
duplication? Because the amount of data can be quite huge the time needed
to transfer data via LAN can be unacceptably long (actually possibility to
repair one server without necessity to stop the second one would be
ideal). We also would prefer not to make customer to transfer data via
changing HDD etc. It would be really good if the whole repair of failed
server and subsequent db synchronization could be done by HW quite capable
but unfortunately DB not-so capable personal (if I want to be diplomatic :-) ).

So these are the reasons why we are considering the HA cluster with
shared storage. Does anybody have better idea?

Thanks.

Martin

On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 19:30:42 -0500, Martin Bouzek wrote:

After the primary fails, one changes the secondary to stand-alone mode or to
primary mode naming the original primary as secondary. Lets take the
stand-alone case as it is most commonly used and more complex to recover from,
but not actually problematic. When the primary machine has been stabilized
and you want to bring that server back online, you just take a level zero
archive from the original secondary, restore to the original primary as a
physical restore (ontape -p), and mark it as secondary restoring replication
just in the other direction. Yes, to swap the server roles back you have to
take both offline, but there's no reason not to live reversed until the next
window when there are no expected users to do the reversal.

Actually, IDS w/HDR is quite capable with NO HDW intervention.

Art S. Kagel

> On Tue, 09 Nov 2004 07:29:16 -0600, nobody wrote:
>
>
>
>> Obnoxio The Chav wrote:
>>> Martin Bouzek said:
>>>
>>>>Hello all,
>>>>
>>>> our company needs to setup an high availability cluster on
>>>>two machines running SCO Open Server and Informix. Does anybody have any
>>>>experience with such configuration or at least can anybody point me where
>>>>to find more information about supported HW minimal versions etc?
>>>
>>>
>>> Aha! Aha! Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah a!
>>>
>>> Perhaps you should rather look at Informix's built in High-availability
>>> Data Replication (HDR)...
>>>
>> More to the point, why run SCO?
>>
>> Not to spread FUD, but check out the financials of SCO.... In light of
>> their failing attempt of suing IBM etc ... they don't have the financials
>> to succeed.
>>
>> My sugestion is to look at Novell re SuSE for a better and more sustainable
>> solution.
>>
>> And yeah, as the clown points out... You're focusing on HW/OS redundancy
>> for HA. You should look at HDR within Informix. Truly still one of the best
>> in industry. ;-)
>>
>> But hey, what do I know? I'm just a nobody. ;-)
>>
>> Ciao!
>
> Well, the whole point is that we have some rather old product which was once
> written in SCO/Informix. One customer wants to upgrade his installation and
> have a backup server. We would like to do it with minimal modifications of
> existing programs as they are not further developed. The HA cluster seems to
> us as the best solution (but there can be the better one which just didn't
> occured to us). If we would be developing something anew we surely wouldn't
> even consider the SCO Open Server.
>
> With the HDR we are afraid it would be problematic to synchronize primary
> and secondary server once one of them broke down (HW problem etc.) without
> necessity to stop the valid one. Is there any reliable and reasonably
> complicated way how to duplicate db while data in it are modified during
> duplication? Because the amount of data can be quite huge the time needed to
> transfer data via LAN can be unacceptably long (actually possibility to
> repair one server without necessity to stop the second one would be ideal).
> We also would prefer not to make customer to transfer data via changing HDD
> etc. It would be really good if the whole repair of failed server and
> subsequent db synchronization could be done by HW quite capable but
> unfortunately DB not-so capable personal (if I want to be diplomatic :-) ).
>
> So these are the reasons why we are considering the HA cluster with shared
> storage. Does anybody have better idea?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Martin