[geeks] Compuholics anonymous

[Joshua D Boyd]

On Mon, Apr 29, 2002 at 06:10:54AM +0100, Chris Byrne wrote:
> There are really five reasons to have multiple machines doing the work that
> a single more powerful machine could do
> 
> 1. I/O and/or memory bandwidth (more sessions, reduced contention etc...)
> 2. Logical and administrative segmentation
> 3. Security (logically and physically isolating functions and access from
> each other)
> 4. Redundancy and fault tolerance
> 5. Coolness factor
> 
> Any one of those alone is a good enough reason to use multiple systems, but
> all four combined, hey you can't beat it. Unless that is you have a nicely
> loaded mainframe which pretty much hoses any of those four reasons, and is
> only one (really really big) box to administer.

If I had enough money, consolidation to an IBM might be possible, presuming
I not only could get the machine, but would also be able to get it fixed
in the event of tragic failure.

-- 
Joshua D. Boyd