On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 10:28 AM, Bob Friesenhahn < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Oct 2008, Tim wrote: > >> >>> I think you'd be surprised how large an organisation can migrate most, >>> if not all of their application servers to zones one or two Thumpers. >>> >>> Isn't that the reason for buying in "server appliances"? >>> >>> I think you'd be surprised how quickly they'd be fired for putting that >> much >> risk into their enterprise. >> > > There is the old saying that "No one gets fired for buying IBM". If one > buys an IBM system which runs 30 isolated instances of Linux, all of which > are used for mission critical applications, is this a similar risk to > consolidating storage on a Thumper since we are really talking about just > one big system? > > In what way is consolidating on Sun/Thumper more or less risky to an > enterprise than consolidating on a big IBM server with many subordinate OS > instances? > > Bob > ====================================== > Bob Friesenhahn > [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ > GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ > > Are you honestly trying to compare a Thumper's reliability to an IBM mainframe? Please tell me that's a joke... We can start at redundant, hot-swappable components and go from there. The thumper can't even hold a candle to Sun's own older sparc platforms. It's not even in the same game as the IBM mainframes. --Tim
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
