Re: Piranha configuration issue? Two boxes needed to actuallystart ser

To: Keith Barrett <kbarrett@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Piranha configuration issue? Two boxes needed to actuallystart services?
Cc: Ed Crotty <ecrotty@xxxxxxxxxxx>, lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Jeremy Hansen <jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 17:13:55 -0400 (EDT)
I for one am very interested in what RH has planned.  For a long time now
I've suspected some very good things to come out of RH in this realm
mainly because it's the hot topic and also because of the team of
developers that RH has.

So...heh, when those details become available, please pass them on!


> Ed Crotty wrote:
> >> 
> > now that it works, should i get off it? :)
> > 
> > or is it reasonable to stick with a working piranha?
> Why would you ask such a question?
> [Community hat off -- company hat on]
> Red Hat is committed to HA Linux and LVS. We are also committed
> to delivering enhanced and needed functionality to HA Linux,
> and the HA work planned spans more than 6 months. I will be
> able to relate some of this shortly.
> [company hat off -- community hat on]
> Speaking for Bryce and myself, our desire is for Linux to get
> the best GPL clustering possible. I personally favor
> communication over competition. If a GPL piece of software
> gets released by someone else and it integrates or is superior
> to parts of piranha, we'd be happy to save ourselves work and
> include it or have it replace such parts. :-). This includes
> deliverables from the failsafe efforts.
> [both hats off]
> So from a user's perspective; I would use whatever GPL software
> best meets your business requirements. You'll get help for any
> of it; especially if you come here to this list.
> >From the developer's perspective, I hope that the various
> software becomes plug-n-play compatible. This is why I think it's
> important that the multiple efforts work together on common APIs.

-- | jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxxx

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>