On 9/21/06, Mark Mulligan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I was wondering if any customers had done an evaluation on the administrative
time or cost (same thing really) improved by using the efficiencies of Solaris
Containers vs. managing individual servers with just one Solaris 10 global zone
or one Solaris 8/9 instance. This is a hot topic at one of my customer's site
right now where some think that the costs are about the same, i.e., one Solaris
Container = one Solaris 8/9 instance or S10 global zone only....taking that
further, ten Solaris Containers = cost of managing ten Solaris 8/9 instances or
S10 global zones only.
We have been using zones for real for about 6 months now and so far
this is what we have seen:
Time to deploy: about 1 day for a server, about 1 hour for a non-global zone
Time to reboot: for non-global zones it is much, much faster than to
reboot a server such as an E2900. Our E2900s take about 15 minutes to
complete self-test and boot (even from an init 6) while non-global
zones on the E2900s generall take under a minute. In both cases, we
then have the application start up times, which are about the same.
So far these are the only two areas where we have seen a substantial difference.
P.S. I am under an NDA, so I can't reveal who this account is.
zones-discuss mailing list