Re: Database Server Consolidation

From: Kevin Brand <kevin.brandx_at_tel.gte.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 10:12:17 -0500
Message-ID: <9c9dou$d5i$1@news.gte.com>

Yes they are, and with their own memory and ( if you do it correctly ) their own EMC array ( or whatever disk subsystem ). So, yes, your Sys Admins are saying consolidate onto one server, but what they're really saying is lets setup N servers in the same "cabinet"

Each of these "machines" stands alone and can be started up, shutdown, upgraded, tuned, thrashed, or whatever without affecting the other "machines" that exist in the same cabinet.

If done correctly and with appropriate levels of redundancy at the hardware level, a solution such as this can work very well.

-Kevin
"andrew_webby at hotmail" <spam_at_no.thanks.com> wrote in message news:988278608.23637.0.nnrp-12.c30bdde2_at_news.demon.co.uk...
> FWIW, the big Sun E1000s can run different OS in each partition. To all
> intents and purposes, they are seperate machines (in effect).
>
> "Martin Haltmayer" <Martin.Haltmayer_at_0800-einwahl.de> wrote in message
> news:3AE7DDE8.31328452_at_0800-einwahl.de...
> > a) the fewer machines are much more difficult to maintain. E. g., you
cannot
> > upgrade machine A to Solaris 2.7 and leave another application untouched
that
> > asks for Solaris 2.6.
>
>
>
Received on Thu Apr 26 2001 - 10:12:17 CDT