On Wed, April 30, 2008 1:54 pm, Michael J McCafferty wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-04-30 at 13:39 -0700, Tracy R Reed wrote: >> Lan Barnes wrote: >> > This is one of those recurring stories, like "Popular Mechanics's" >> flying >> > car. Still, with the exception of #7 (Xen --because it has been >> recently >> > debunked here), I think she nailed it >> >> Huh? Xen works as advertised and it is great. It is saving my company >> tons of money and gives us capabilities we did not have before which >> helps us react quickly to our clients needs. I wouldn't say it has been >> "debunked" at all. >> > > ...and I will add that plenty of people are buying servers from us to > perform server consolidation and setting up tons of Xen VMs on a single > bigger box. My theory is that people make more "machines" total when > they can make virtual ones, which ultimately sells more hardware than > actually needed since the VMs need RAM to exist. >
My uninformed, unprofessional take on VM has always been that it's a boon to those who (1) use windows servers, or (2) have a gazillion test environments that they need to CM. #1 because windoze is a jealous god, and the only sure way to restart a service is to bounce the machine, which is drastic if more than one stretegic service is aboard. #2 for obvious reasons to a quality guy and SCM specialist. But if the server(s) are there just to run services, just use Linux naked because you can stop and restart services safely. Comments? -- Lan Barnes SCM Analyst Linux Guy Tcl/Tk Enthusiast Biodiesel Brewer -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
