[Info-vax] VMware

[Grant Taylor]

On 12/9/19 5:48 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> Even a relative low end and low cost physical server can usually 
> run a lot of VM's today. Maybe 20 or 40 or 80 depending on size and 
> workload. Virtualization saves money even with high VMWare licensee 
> costs.

VMs also offer a redundancy / hardware abstraction layer that hardware 
can't match.

It's trivial to (re)start a VM on another host, even when the host it 
was running on throws sparks and flames or otherwise turns into a pile 
of slag.

Yes, you can have redundant physical systems for OpenVMS.  But that has 
scalability issues.

It's trivial to have multiple VMware hosts provide physical redundancy 
for many VMs.  So you end up with a much smaller number of machines 
needed for the redundancy.  Plus, it's relatively easy to get a new 
VMware host and add it to a cluster without needing to change anything 
about the guest OS.



-- 
Grant. . . .
unix || die