Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

VMware, Inc. Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • wayward_variable wayward_variable Sep 13, 2007 5:24 PM Flag

    VMW is undervalued!

    "The only way to take utilize an 80core processor is to build VMs on top of it."

    Obviously someone that has never seen large number crunching platforms or large scale OLTP.

    There are plenty of applications that can fully utilize a 128 core M9000 without having to bother with adding virtualization overhead, and when you can't afford an M9000 there's always Mosix or Beowulf.

    Contrary to popular opinion, Server virtualization isn't new, it isn't applicable 100% of the time and it isn't magic.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • "Obviously someone that has never seen large number crunching platforms or large scale OLTP"

      Actually I have. Have you seen Georgia Tech's protein synthesis cluster or their physics cluster? What I failed to do was clarify where these 80 core etc .. clusters would go. What we do is is use 2 - 4 core bladecenters and use VM to divide the processing power for servers that don't need 2 -4 cores. Imagine when 80 cores are available. Are you really going to run postfix, ldap, ntp etc ... on 80 core processors? Nope! But you probably would like to divide the processing power into discreet chunks for low load servers. Imagine running all those servers on say 2 systems using one for hardware redundancy. But please don't try to babble something about huge NOAH clusters or the like and compare their processor needs to what every day businesses needsfor systems. This is where VMs are valuable and are who VMware markets to.

      • 3 Replies to gatechne
      • Good rebuttal Gate, glad to have you aboard. I see You, wayward, and Jav.121212 as our best experts here on hardware for this board. (and so far, only you and Jav.121212 have ever made good counter points for Wayward and where he has not come back to refute it which he easily does with other tech posters here) Wayward likes VMW, just sees it overvalued. So, seeing you and Jav not feel that way gives balance to me for VMW's price going forward.

        Thanks to all of you for your continued input - JT

      • Hold up there lone ranger.. I wasn't the one that said "VMWare was the ONLY way to utilize 80 processor cores ..." like I said there are plenty of number crunching and OLTP platforms out there where virtualization makes no sense to maximize utilization of that (or greater) number of processor cores.

        As far as running "postfix, ldap, ntp, etc..," VMWare isn't the only option for those types of applications either, proper capacity planning and hardware tasking can take of most of the requirements for backoffice and infrastructure services applications, as long as you do it before you start writing purchase orders.... of course half the engineers in IT today seem to be too lazy (or too under trained) to do it and would just rather throw money at the problem.

        "But please don't try to babble something about huge NOAH clusters or the like and compare their processor needs to what every day businesses needsfor systems. "

        I wasn't the one babbling.... I'm well aware of the realities of where virtualization fits in the real world, after all the technology is nothing new to me.

      • What he said.

 
VMW
89.13+0.62(+0.70%)Jul 31 4:05 PMEDT