Jay wrote:
Understood. I believe the upgrade from v7 to v9 is free. My
experience so far is that it's a completely stable platform, so the
change from v7 is virtually un-noticeable. Seriously, I support
clients with both platforms and I can't tell the difference until I
use a v9 feature, or I do a 'which'. YMMV

Yes, this makes sense.

Thanks

*******************************

The problem is you have a active file system that no commercial
software is going to understand. You can obviously use any type of os
level replication or even san replication, but your second copy when
you bring it on line will act just like if the power was pulled. Your
VME will be your biggest concern and you will probably have some GFE's
spread around the FSI.

Keep in mind this is no different for any other database, such as SQL
Server. You cannot just replicate a SQL store to a second server and
expect it to work cleanly, instead you are supposed to use SQL
replication or a special built internal SQL tool.

On Jul 15, 5:37 am, Tony Gravagno <tony_grava... (AT) nospam (DOT) invalid>
wrote:
Tony,

You are right, our Visage.DRS product hasn't had any real traction in
the US - don't know why, and whilst this part of the Visage stack
couldn't be accused of having "too many features" (it "just"
replicates data to 1 or more other D3 servers), refer to the mv
Tollbox thread/saga to realize simply being a "good product" isn't
always enough.

Whilst V9 does make hot backup available for the D3 Windows platform,
I believe it has the same issues/shortfalls as the AIX/Linux platforms
in terms of handling network transport failures, requiring manual
intervention to restart, which could actually mean that unless you are
continually monitoring a system, it may not actually be replicating,
and you can still only "mirror" rather than replicate across multiple
sites.

I'd love to be able to get in & get TL to redo their hotbackup
leveraging something more robust, like MSMQ (given codebase with MQ
series product I wouldn't have thought it would be that hard/
different), but ....

That said, I believe TL roadmap for v9.2 may include support for
database snapshots (not sure if limited to just windows or virtual
environments), which in turn could open the door for 3rd party
products to be able to snap in, but that is some time off. Still at
least they are talking about it, and a full 64 bit version with large
memory support, so I'm encouraged that there is at least a plan for
the future :-)

Oh, and for what it is worth, Visage.DRS treats a clear-file as a
single transaction, so clearing a 1Gb file would typically transmit
less than 100 bytes ..... now POPULATING that file with, say, a T-LOAD
is a different issue --> just cnn't avoid the 1Gb transfer, and THAT
can mean that systems do get out of sync for a while (not as big an
issue if they are local, but pumping out over an internet connection
will take a while :-(

If the 1Gb of data corresponded to 1,000,000 records that someone
SELECTed & then DELETEd, then there is going to be a few megs of data
transmitted, but that is unavoidable

If anyone is interested, you can download the Visage.DRS brochure from
http://www.stamina.com.au/Visage/visageDRS.htm and/or drop me an email