Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Marc Van Dyck <marc.gr.vandyck@invalid.skynet.be>
Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
Subject: Re: Upcoming time boundary events
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2025 10:27:46 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <mn.22737e965748b454.104627@invalid.skynet.be>
References: <100fp4v$1nmtf$1@dont-email.me> <100omli$3t023$1@dont-email.me> <100qdop$6q13$1@dont-email.me> <100qg5t$3jb0$1@dont-email.me> <1014ad8$2jurh$1@dont-email.me> <101dnbj$omrq$1@dont-email.me> <mn.fae77e95a3bdb69b.104627@invalid.skynet.be> <101f0ei$1568p$1@dont-email.me> <mn.127a7e96667d7f35.104627@invalid.skynet.be> <101k5v2$39d9f$2@dont-email.me> <mn.1a717e9607ac2d22.104627@invalid.skynet.be> <101n08c$23ta$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2025 10:27:46 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f99bd735afc02e4393ba911dd2098a9d";
	logging-data="766003"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18ifiP2Y05WQAzZJONVgyos"
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ba7rO+pVL+U1qjBS4RclelptzHU=
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.06.00-gb
X-Face: #0?irvdFiM!(Tpl}/tO%_kuSW_^9G5aeIEnY1uNPcd@N_U.B30\*[%N-cnqSC,rEfeq\m:b oR({RM{x03]Iv}^2xc7\J][^MkbL3DYdLevZ$&h0WbH!i:>O1i#FLy/mO2G~xMF<YSj^@q9sRC~iP> *uQnfN4xre8v9%0fqg;i.!ymm~6w2nEx);Q~Q*8&dUO(fn
Bytes: 3581

Arne Vajhøj used his keyboard to write :
> On 6/3/2025 4:25 AM, Marc Van Dyck wrote:
>> Arne Vajhøj expressed precisely :
>>> On 6/2/2025 4:34 AM, Marc Van Dyck wrote:
>>>> Arne Vajhøj has brought this to us :
>>>>> But again my impression is that often the VMS systems are in same
>>>>> server room and no routing required.
>>>>
>>>> Several OpenVMS systems today are used in disaster-tolerant
>>>> configurations. That implies at least two different locations.
>>>
>>> True.
>>>
>>> But at the risk of sounding like a broken record, that is also
>>> something I got the impression is getting rarer.
>>>
>>> But I don't know.
>>>
>>> How many multi-site VMS clusters do you know?
>> 
>> At least the one that I was in charge of before I retired last year.
>> Two sites, 3 main applications, 3 production clusters, 3 other ones
>> on a distant site for disaster tolerance, 3 test systems, one for
>> development, two clusters for system management, and two for system
>> testing/crash & burn activities. FC storage with asynchronous long
>> distance replication. Backups on shared robots. Lots of fun...
>
> Dan just posted a question on the VSI forum about a 6 node cluster.
> So clusters do exist.
>
> I just see very few questions related to clusters. But maybe system
> managers running clusters are generally more competent than average.
>
> And very few need clusters for load volume leaving mostly HA reason.
>
> Arne

Indeed. Clusters used the be a way to add compute power by horizontal
scaling, because vertical scaling was either impossible or 
unaffordable.
Today compute power is cheap, so clustering is mostly a high
availability tool. With the consequence that large number of nodes have
largely disappeared ; most clusters are now two or three (if you don't
want a quorum disk) nodes only. I still remember the development 
cluster
I ran 25 years ago, a large LAVC with some 50 satellites that used to
take half a day to reboot...

-- 
Marc Van Dyck