I only got a few responses to this note (and I'll follow up with those) -- not a big problem, since I've got contacts/references/resources to use. But I'd hoped for "in the trenches" information, good/bad news about using VM for d/r, comparisons with alternatives, lessons learned, evaluations of cost/benefit of VM vs. other techniques, etc. Not necessarily super-detailed, this article is more for evaluation of VM-based d/r than implementation. I'll write the article next week, so if this is on anyone's "get around to this" list, real soon would be a good time. Thanks.
---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 11:20:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Gabe Goldberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: undisclosed-recipients: ; Subject: Writing article on using VM for disaster planning/recovery Crossposted to VMESA-L, IBM-MAIN, VSE-L, LINUX-390. I'm writing an article for Computer Economics' (http://computereconomics.com/) newsletter, on "cost-effective enterprise disaster planning/preparation/testing/recovery with VM". I'll appreciate responses describing how organizations use VM for disaster-related efforts, especially illustrating how using VM compares to other alternatives considered or used, tips for efficiency and cost savings, gotchas and problems encountered, lessons learned, any products/services used, whether you use VM with a disaster recovery vendor, anything showing real-world lessons. And, of course, if there are reasons *not* to use VM -- share those too. Please copy responses directly to [EMAIL PROTECTED] since I read these lists as digests. Thanks. -- Gabriel Goldberg, Computers and Publishing, Inc. (703) 941-1657 6580 Bermuda Green Court, Alexandria, VA 22312-3103 [EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.cpcug.org/user/gabe>
