Re: Live Partition Mobility Question 'vs' POWER-HA. -- MIDRANGE-L

Subject: Re: Live Partition Mobility Question 'vs' POWER-HA.
From: Jim Oberholtzer <midrangel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 13:09:06 -0600
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l>
List-help: <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

What are you trying to accomplish? One provides for a separate system and storage, the other common storage (that is replicated by the storage manager) and separate systems. One's aimed at High Availability ones aimed at Continuous availability.

PowerHA is cheaper, but has the drawback of requiring iASPs.

Jim Oberholtzer
Chief Technical Architect
Agile Technology Architects

On 1/31/2013 12:20 PM, Jack Kingsley wrote:

Has anyone installed this, pros/cons. I have been reading the requirements
and they seem lengthy as well as pricey. Is there any real significant
gains to doing LPM 'vs' POWER-HA. A major requirement for LPM is SAN where
POWER-HA could be either or from what I am reading.
--

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

Re: Live Partition Mobility Question 'vs' POWER-HA. , Jack Kingsley

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.