On 8/3/2011 7:44 AM, Invisible wrote:
> * Tens of thousands of times more expensive than a direct connection.
>
> * Hundreds of thousands of times reduced performance compared to a
> direct connection.
>
> * Radically increased complexity compared to a direct connection.
>
> * If the storage network fails, ALL servers fail, so you're adding a new
> single point of failure.
>
> * All the servers now have to share the limited bandwidth available. One
> busy server can bring all the others to a crawl.
>
> * Significantly more "enterprisey" than a direct connection.
>
> Actually, wait... those are all disadvantages. Really, really /big/
> disadvantages. Huh, OK. So why on Earth would any sane person embark on
> this course of action??
>
>...

Hmm.. So, in tech, its the same as everything else now. Facts, reality, 
and sane policy don't matter, just whether or not the idea sells? lol

Post a reply to this message