Comments on: awareness [VMWare] http://www.shaneschnell.com/2007/12/10/awareness-vmware/ shaneschnell.com Fri, 29 Oct 2010 18:53:45 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Blake http://www.shaneschnell.com/2007/12/10/awareness-vmware/comment-page-1/#comment-231 Blake Thu, 03 Jan 2008 21:22:11 +0000 http://www.shaneschnell.com/2007/12/10/awareness-vmware/#comment-231 I heartily agree with you Shane. VMWare really does rock. I've used it quite a bit in my software jobs as test platforms and I've known of several companies that have doubled their server density by running two VMs on a single box (Apparently this is the density that VMWare recommended as of two years ago in order to guarantee performance) in production. Christopher: the beauty of running servers on vms is that the whole "machine" is simply a set of data files, meaning the machine is portable and can be easily replicated by simply copying the data files. You can also take snapshots of the server in various states so that you can very easily roll-back when it encounters problems. For example: if you've just finished installing and configuring an MS Exchange server and have verified that it works, you'd take a snapshot of the computer at that point. That way if something funky happens in the future and the server stops working, you can simply "roll back" to that snapshot and voila, your server is working again. :-) I heartily agree with you Shane. VMWare really does rock. I’ve used it quite a bit in my software jobs as test platforms and I’ve known of several companies that have doubled their server density by running two VMs on a single box (Apparently this is the density that VMWare recommended as of two years ago in order to guarantee performance) in production.

Christopher: the beauty of running servers on vms is that the whole “machine” is simply a set of data files, meaning the machine is portable and can be easily replicated by simply copying the data files. You can also take snapshots of the server in various states so that you can very easily roll-back when it encounters problems. For example: if you’ve just finished installing and configuring an MS Exchange server and have verified that it works, you’d take a snapshot of the computer at that point. That way if something funky happens in the future and the server stops working, you can simply “roll back” to that snapshot and voila, your server is working again. :-)

]]> By: christopher http://www.shaneschnell.com/2007/12/10/awareness-vmware/comment-page-1/#comment-119 christopher Tue, 11 Dec 2007 06:36:45 +0000 http://www.shaneschnell.com/2007/12/10/awareness-vmware/#comment-119 actually suv's being used to their full potential would only be true if it results in less overall usage of automobiles by others. otherwise, the impact of an suv being used is the same whether 1 or 8 people is in it. so simply being full doesn't make it "better." in fact, if it is full, it's using more gas to pull the weight and is actually worse for the environment. like neil postman said when decrying television - good television is worse, because it makes you want to watch television, and the problem is watching in the first place. that said, if vmware actually works and allows us to make more efficient use of our servers, that's great. two things i would want to know; 1) what's the extra heat and electricity usage when a server is being loaded more (thus more environmental impact) and 2) does it really work? servers crash enough as it is, are we smart enough to make software that really optimizes them to the point that it's worth it? not knowing anything about vmware is sounds suspiciously like the kind of software platform my work's hosting company switched us to so they could throw thousands of websites on a server farm. sure, they get to reduce overhead substantially, but overall service went down the tubes and problems rose exponentially. sounds great in theory, a whole other thing in practice. but you're absolutely right in suggesting that better use of our resources is part of the solution. actually suv’s being used to their full potential would only be true if it results in less overall usage of automobiles by others. otherwise, the impact of an suv being used is the same whether 1 or 8 people is in it. so simply being full doesn’t make it “better.” in fact, if it is full, it’s using more gas to pull the weight and is actually worse for the environment. like neil postman said when decrying television – good television is worse, because it makes you want to watch television, and the problem is watching in the first place.

that said, if vmware actually works and allows us to make more efficient use of our servers, that’s great. two things i would want to know; 1) what’s the extra heat and electricity usage when a server is being loaded more (thus more environmental impact) and 2) does it really work? servers crash enough as it is, are we smart enough to make software that really optimizes them to the point that it’s worth it? not knowing anything about vmware is sounds suspiciously like the kind of software platform my work’s hosting company switched us to so they could throw thousands of websites on a server farm. sure, they get to reduce overhead substantially, but overall service went down the tubes and problems rose exponentially. sounds great in theory, a whole other thing in practice.

but you’re absolutely right in suggesting that better use of our resources is part of the solution.

]]>