Subject: Re: Better than..
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Eric Delcamp <e.delcamp.NO_SPAM@wanadoo.fr>
Date: 01/05/2000 22:17:41
At my company, we have UPS (5 hours) and better than this, our own power
source (500 hours).
During the last week, a storm strike our country (Hey Manuel, are you all
right ? ;-). No power. UPS work OK, but after the 5 hours, the start of the
other power source (don't know the translation of "groupe electrogene") fail
due to mechanical problem. All servers crash (too bad for NT/Winframe/Notes,
no real damage for Novell (my babies), some problems for Sun Solaris, really
lots of damages for IBM S/390)
The compagny spend a lots of money on backup power, but even with all of
that, we could not have a garantee. This could happend to everyone. You
should think about it.
----- Message d'origine -----
De : Ted Lemon <email@example.com>
└ : <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc : Manuel Bouyer <email@example.com>; <firstname.lastname@example.org>;
EnvoyÚ : mercredi 5 janvier 2000 14:23
Objet : Re: Better than..
> > To be serious, you wouldn┤t do 1.) to a machine on real life.
> You wouldn't. The power company would. I have no personal
> experience with Linux behaving the way Manuel described, but if it
> does, this is a real problem. You can't count on perfect power
> delivery, even if you have a UPS. Safe recovery from a power failure
> is important.