[THIN] Re: blades versus VMWARE

  • From: Roger.Carlsen@xxxxxxxxxxxx
  • To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 21:07:59 +0200

My so called "two cents":

VMware allows us to right-size our servers. Mixing applications are not
always the way to go. Virtualizing our environment means for example we have
more spare capacity for UATs, Beta-testing etc. We don't waste capacity on
specific applications, resources can be shared if not maxed out. In our
(meaning me and my company, and the "old days") servers tended to be either
under- or over-utilized. VMWare allows us to allocate resources (CPU,
Memory, Net) to whichever server needs it.

We love it - and as a bonus it decreases our time to restore (ie. DR
scenario).

R



-----Original Message-----
From: Shonk, Joe - Perot
To: 'thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Sent: 4/16/2004 7:33 PM
Subject: [THIN] Re: blades versus VMWARE

Not for MF, well I guess I'll have to go back to the drawing board..

VMWare is great for MF.  Considering we have a large number of server
and
apps (Think Healthcare/Hospital/HIPAA).  It's a waste of resource to
dedicate two servers to a single application set that is used by 5-10
physicians.  Also, consider that many apps only reside on 1 server
because
purchasing a second server is not cost effective.  By sharing physical
resources it become cost effective to load balance those application
sets.
So why not install apps all on one server?  For one, different
department
own the equipments.  Some of these apps are so flaky that they barely
run on
a server all by themselves, let alone with another application.

Benefits:
        MF VMs Not hardware dependent (We have a mix of different server
vendors, models, etc)
        MF VMs can be moved to a different server easily of it require
more
resources that the current physical box can provide.
        Introduce Redunancy for application sets that currently reside
on a
single server
        Instantly provision a server for urgent group/project.  It's
kinda
hard to ghost an image to server/blade if you have an extra one handy.
        Ability to take a live production box and take into the lab for
testing/upgrades
        Taking servers down to periodically make/push down ghost images
is
not always feasable in a 24/7 shop.
        Instead of ghosting,  I can bring up a new Citrix server on the
same
ESX box.  Test it and when I'm ready to put it in production and replace
the
old server running that app all I have to do is change the published app
and
sunset the old VM server..  And with no downtime or extra hardware.

Joe




-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Lynch [mailto:lynch00@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 9:30 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] Re: blades versus VMWARE


I know that most people view Vmware as a great way for DR.  But with a
MF
server, it's quite easy to get it up and running again.  My question is
why
would you still want to use Vmware for MF, especially on a blade server?
Ok, maybe the BL series from HP, but surely not the PE1655MC.  Your MF
servers are going to need all of the resources of the physical box.  You
gain nothing (maybe 2-5 more users per VM; maybe) with MF within a VM.

I just don't see MF within a VM as a viable solution (with the ONLY
exception of DR, but isn't that what Ghost/Sysprep images are for?).

I see VM as a great solution to web servers, DNS servers, F&P servers,
DB
servers, etc.  I just don't see VM as a great solution for production MF
servers.  Dev lab/environment; oh hell yeah.  Production; I just don't
think
you gain yourself anything (again, with the exception of DR).

Chris 

-----Original Message-----
From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf
Of Shonk, Joe - Perot
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 8:48 AM
To: 'thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: [THIN] Re: blades versus VMWARE

So why not run VMWare on blades?

Joe

-----Original Message-----
From: Luchette, Jon [mailto:JLuchette@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 8:20 AM
To: thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [THIN] blades versus VMWARE


Just wanted to get a discussion going on a decision that I am trying to
tackle in terms of MF...  Right now our environment looks like this:
seven
MF servers running MF XP FR3 on Windows 2k Server sp4, 2 NFuse servers
also
with CSG installed on both running Win2k Advanced Server sp4, and all
servers are Compaq DL 360's (some G1, some G2)  with dual 1ghz
processors
and 2gb RAM, we have a SAN now (HP EVA 5000) but are not currently
housing
any MF data on it. 
 
Ideally we would be able to install MF on some new blade servers, house
the
data on the SAN, and utilize VMWARE as well.  That is not going to
happen
here, we just don't have the money for it.  However, we may have the
money
for either one OR the other.  All things considered in terms of MF in
particular, which one would you rather have in your data center and why?
I
know they do different things, but when you match those things up
against
one another, which one has more advantages? 
 
/jL
 

********************************************************
This week's sponsor - Neoware Thin Clients Neoware makes computing open,
secure, reliable, affordable, manageable and obsolete-free. 
Starting at $199! 
http://www.neoware.com
**********************************************************
Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
http://thin.net/links.cfm
***********************************************************
For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or set Digest or Vacation mode
use
the below link:
http://thin.net/citrixlist.cfm

********************************************************
This week's sponsor - Neoware Thin Clients Neoware makes computing open,
secure, reliable, affordable, manageable and obsolete-free. 
Starting at $199! 
http://www.neoware.com
**********************************************************
Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
http://thin.net/links.cfm
***********************************************************
For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or set Digest or Vacation mode
use
the below link:
http://thin.net/citrixlist.cfm

********************************************************
This week's sponsor - Neoware Thin Clients
Neoware makes computing open, secure, reliable, 
affordable, manageable and obsolete-free. 
Starting at $199! 
http://www.neoware.com 
**********************************************************
Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
http://thin.net/links.cfm
***********************************************************
For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or 
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
http://thin.net/citrixlist.cfm

********************************************************
This week's sponsor - Neoware Thin Clients
Neoware makes computing open, secure, reliable, 
affordable, manageable and obsolete-free. 
Starting at $199! 
http://www.neoware.com 
**********************************************************
Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
http://thin.net/links.cfm
***********************************************************
For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or 
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
http://thin.net/citrixlist.cfm
=

If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you should not
review, print, re-transmit, store or take any actions based on the content
of this e-mail or any attachments. Please contact the sender by e-mail and
delete the material from any computer.


********************************************************
This week's sponsor - Neoware Thin Clients
Neoware makes computing open, secure, reliable, 
affordable, manageable and obsolete-free. 
Starting at $199! 
http://www.neoware.com 
**********************************************************
Useful Thin Client Computing Links are available at:
http://thin.net/links.cfm
***********************************************************
For Archives, to Unsubscribe, Subscribe or 
set Digest or Vacation mode use the below link:
http://thin.net/citrixlist.cfm

Other related posts: