[racktables-users] Re: Virtual Server

The base problem seems simple. a few more layers of abstraction should do.
Maybe being able to define that this 6u can contain upto 10 6ux1.9in units?

The differing orientations could be the showstopper.
I dont see a good way around that without creating generics and the
special templates when a new vendor shakes things up.

On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 6:08 PM, Josh Kuo <josh.kuo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I think it would be difficult to mimic all the blade servers out
>  there, since some blades go in vertically, while some fit in
>  horizontally, and when you get to switch modules you may even have
>  some modules that are bigger than some others, some have two per row,
>  some have 4 per row...
>
>  I'll find some pictures later and post them to the list to illustrate my 
> point.
>
>
>
>
>
>  On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 8:55 AM, Denis Ovsienko <pilot@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>  > > This sounds like a good work around for now, however are there any
>  >  > plans to support servers as containers for virtual servers?
>  >
>  >  I'd like to see a good representation for module switches and blade
>  >  servers, if there is any.
>  >
>  >  --
>  >     DO4-UANIC
>  >
>  >
>
>

Other related posts: