|
Yeah, thats really what load balancing is. You would have to spend some money, possibly setup some more drives and machines, but the load balancer would detect faults coming through and route them accordingly to the fastest machine. Once the machine that was the fastest has a lot more traffic coming to it, it's obviously not the fastest machine anymore and the traffic gets routed elsewhere.
I would also hope that the machines you have running Raid 0 have tape backups for them? That would be nice if they aren't in place.
What might need to happen is one night you tell your customers that you need to save their sql tables and bring down the servers. Cluster all of the machines and let them replicate on the fly. Enable load-balancing and go from there. I believe that MS SQL can be load balanced, in that it doesn't use shared memory on one machine (ie. they would use memory on the local machine).
Another suggesting might be that you actually just build a large NAS through Fibre Channel connections and store all of your data on there. Have all of the traffic balanced on several machines and have MS SQL point to the NAS. If you do this, your NAS will generate considerable heat considering the drives would be moving most all the time (if you're really getting hit a lot). At least this way you would gain redundancy and have speed through Fibre Channel.
__________________
"You hear the one about the fella who died, went to the pearly gates? St. Peter let him in. Sees a guy in a suit making a closing argument. Says, "Who's that?" St. Peter says, "Oh, that's God. Thinks he's Denny Crane."
|