yes I realise about the single point of failure. Ideally of course we'd have
separate physical servers for this. It's an intranet so security is less of
an issue. There just seem to be advantages from running virtual machines.
I'm not an expert but aren't they easier to manage, rollback and
On 11/7/07, michael nt milne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anyone tried this or had any experience with this? We're using Enfold
Server and for staging and development purposes instead of using separate
machines we're thinking of setting up a 'virtual machines' on the same
server. There appear
On 11/7/07, michael nt milne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
yes I realise about the single point of failure. Ideally of course we'd have
separate physical servers for this. It's an intranet so security is less of
an issue. There just seem to be advantages from running virtual machines.
I'm not an
ok, so you could have two virtual machines say development and also staging
which sat alongside a live production 'non virtual' instance of Zope. This
would all sit on the one physical machine. The dev and staging instances
would be switched off and on as required. With enough RAM and CPU would
On 11/7/07, michael nt milne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ok, so you could have two virtual machines say development and also staging
which sat alongside a live production 'non virtual' instance of Zope. This
would all sit on the one physical machine. The dev and staging instances
would be
