[IRCServices] New services implementations & Updates?

[Tyson La Tourrette]

True. I was thinking of a three (or more) box design. Which would
include a dedicated database server. Even in this case the database
would be the weak link. I would be fun to set up and configure though
=)

OK, this would be practical for very large networks only. 

Probably isn't a good reason to implement DBs though.

tyson

On Mon, 29 May 2000, Ross Bemrose (Powerlord) wrote:

> By saying SQL provides true realtime redundancy, you forget one point:
> If the master services splits because it is DOSed or the ISPs uplink has
> problems, the SQL server is going to be just as lagged as the master
> services.  The only solution to that would be to have a database server
> running on each set of services, and the amount of overhead that would cause
> is astronomical, because they'd need to sync up at every minor change.
> 
> Wow, first post for me to...  in the almost 6 months of subscribing to this
> list.
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tyson La Tourrette" <tower at pdx.edu>
> To: <ircservices at delirious.shadowfire.org>
> Sent: Sunday, May 28, 2000 7:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [IRCServices] New services implementations & Updates?
> 
> 
> > Well one benefit I do see with an SQL DB is the potential for multiple
> > services (on different servers) to access the same DB and thus provide
> > true realtime redundency. Wouldn't be needed for small networks (like
> > the one I run) but for the larger ones it would be very nice I would
> > think.
> >
> > Just a thought.
> >
> > Tyson
> >
> > (first post, so if you don't remember me that'd be why)


---------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo at ender.shadowfire.org
with "unsubscribe ircservices" in the body, without the quotes.