Re: just a question (virtual machines)
Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 13:48:27 -0700 (PDT)
On May 13, 11:02 am, Shakespeare <what..._at_xs4all.nl> wrote:
> gs schreef:
> > My workplace is seriously considering going to virtual machines for most
> > of the servers, including database servers. We are a windows shop and
> > have several VMware servers running test env's now. I am not in favour
> > of running production db's on vm's, but I don't have the final say here.
> > Having said that, I have had many test db's on vms for over two years
> > now and they have been trouble free.. I'm recommending that we take a
> > good look at Oracle's VM if we go this route, but I know I'll hit
> > resistance here too.
> > I haven't had a chance to download and play with Oracles vm yet, so I
> > don't know a lot about it.
> > If you were told you were going to all vm's for database servers, would
> > you be comfortable with VMware or would you fight tooth & nail to go
> > with Oracle's?
> Latest news: Oracle buys Virtual Iron (VM management software). I would
> definitely wait for a while....
You beat me to it (because I'm waiting for files to be copied to this new computer, finally using Firefox). This morning boss was fuming about how Oracle bought them right after we bought VI (which is the one I've been sporadically complaining about, purposefully not naming). He thinks it is good technically (and he and his staff know far more about netadmin than I do, and I did hear something about the management tools being good), but he's also one who has been seriously abused by Oracle licensing and sales practices, and avoids choosing Oracle whenever possible.
There is this tv show called My Name Is Earl, it's a comedy about karma... it's also the name of the tech copying my files... :-)
-- _at_home.com is bogus. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/05/13/oracle_buys_virtual_iron/Received on Wed May 13 2009 - 15:48:27 CDT