[THIN] Re: blades versus VMWARE

  • From: "Chris Lynch" <lynch00@xxxxxxx>
  • To: <thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 12:13:49 -0700

Comments inline.

Chris 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Shonk, Joe - Perot
> Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 10:33 AM
> To: 'thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx'
> 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)

True.  This does provide for easeir management of the VM, as you aren't
relying on the hardware.

>       MF VMs can be moved to a different server easily of it 
> require more resources that the current physical box can provide.

I agree.  In most instances, I just don't see the cost value for this on
most copmanies.

>       Introduce Redunancy for application sets that currently 
> reside on a single server

Yes, this is always a good idea.

>       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.

I think you meant that it's hard to image/ghost a server/blade when you
don't have an extra server handy.  I get that.  But every company (rather,
most companies should) have a maintenance schedule.  During that maintenance
schedule, you can easily grab an image of a server using Ghost, Alteris,
PowerQuest.  Hell, if you have the V2i Server product, you can get an online
image of a server.

>       Ability to take a live production box and take into the 
> lab for testing/upgrades

This is very true.

>       Taking servers down to periodically make/push down 
> ghost images is not always feasable in a 24/7 shop.

Read my comment above.

>       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.

Yes, this is easy to accomplish with Vmware.  Don't get me wrong.  I
completely agree with the whole VM concept.  I'm just trying to get most
engineers feelings on why to use ESX/GSX for a VM instance of MF.  You made
a comment that there are some apps that don't play nice with others, and
there would be a very small subset of users accessing this application.  I
didn't think of that one.  That is a very good case, and I would think most
companies would want to jump at that idea.  "hey, I can get a DL380-G3
server up and running with ESX, and provision multiple MF servers with their
isolated application installed on them each."  That would save the company
more money in the long and short run then purchasing n number of physical
servers (360's or 380's, etc.)

> 
> 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
> 


********************************************************
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: