Mark Mulligan wrote:
We've seen other less obvious benefits as well. As part of the
migration from our single app/server model, we've been able to build in
much more standardized installs. This standardization has lead to the
ability to automate much of the application administration as well,
especially in the app/web server space. Since we know we have standard
paths, role accounts, and system/zone naming conventions, we can
auto-deploy most of our apps, and script the bouncing of applications.
Recently we've been able to delegate these tasks to out-sourced test
teams, so our environment support team doesn't need to deploy or bounce
apps in the middle of the night which was previously delaying testing,
and making our support team grumpy as well.
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.
Any thoughts, opinions, studies are appreciated.
In our integrated environment we have now standardized the set of
environments deployed for an application up front. We have production,
4 test/qa, and 2 dev environments. When a new application is being
developed, they entire set of environments can be created early in the
process. Previously, a team would have to get budget for development
environments, then after enough progress was made, justify budged for
test and production environments. Sometimes there simply wasn't enough
time or budget to acquire all of the equipment to create all of the
environments and standards could not be enforced. That no longer
happens. And should a project die on the vine, the zones created for it
had next to no overhead for us, and can be reaped easily.
While not on the subject of managing zones, we've also found that the
cost benefit of zone is much greater than just the savings on the
physical server. We did an internal study that showed that the up front
cost of the server was really only around 20% of the total cost of
running that server in the datacenter over it's life (I'm not sure if
they use 3 or 5 years) when cabling, racks, power, cooling... were
Hope that helps,
zones-discuss mailing list