Mon, 27 Apr 1992 17:15:42 +0200
|
On Sun, 26 Apr 1992 15:41:09 EST Murph Sewall <SEWALL@UCONNVM> said:
>Evidently, keeping RSCS running is non-trivial (else it typically would
>have been fixed before I noticed that a problem existed - when suddenly
>there's a queue of 1000+ files, that's a clue as to how long it took to
>restore the connection).
To keep RSCS running on SEARN, we have a staff of one systems programmer
and zero operators. The situation of HEARN is similar, except that they
have operators. Both machines are EARN core nodes and handle a lot of
traffic; neither has local users who could complain when they notice a
problem. The monitored availability of the link between SEARN and HEARN,
excluding march where we had a major hardware and software upgrade at
SEARN, is between about 98% and 99.x% (the resolution of the monitor is
not high enough to give fully valid results when the downtime is less
than about 1%). This is our most reliable international link; others
typically end up at a non-dedicated machine which is sometimes taken down
for activities related to the support of local users. This is seldom a
serious inconvenience, but does introduce a few percent of downtime.
Eric
|
|
|