<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Evaluating High-Availability (HA) vs. Fault Tolerant (FT) Solutions</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/b/clustering/archive/2010/10/06/10072013.aspx</link><description>When evaluating how to increase availability and reduce downtime for your deployments, solutions can commonly be categorized as either a 'High Availability' solution or a 'Fault Tolerant' solution. In this blog I thought I would take a moment to discuss</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>Telligent Evolution Platform Developer Build (Build: 5.6.50428.7875)</generator><item><title>re: Evaluating High-Availability (HA) vs. Fault Tolerant (FT) Solutions</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/b/clustering/archive/2010/10/06/10072013.aspx#10072732</link><pubDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2010 13:30:16 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:10072732</guid><dc:creator>David Bermingham, MVP</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Excellent article Elden! &amp;nbsp;I wrote a similar article that talks about the virtualization availability options including HA vs. FT as well as host vs. guest based clusters.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://clusteringformeremortals.com/2009/08/14/making-sense-of-virtualization-availability-options-2/"&gt;clusteringformeremortals.com/.../making-sense-of-virtualization-availability-options-2&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=10072732" width="1" height="1"&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>