[Info-vax] WHY IS VSI REQUIRING A HYPERVISOR FOR X86 OPENVMS?

[David Wade]

On 01/01/2021 20:09, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 1/1/2021 11:31 AM, Dave Froble wrote:
>> On 1/1/2021 10:13 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>> On 1/1/2021 7:17 AM, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>> Unless they need a solution where the application can survive the loss
>>>> of a data centre.
>>>
>>> That really has not much to do with VM vs non-VM or VMS vs non-VMS.
>>>
>>> Data center redundancy is a common concept.
>>
>> Thinking a bit more about this ....
>>
>> I have no experience using VMs, other than a bit of learning a few 
>> months back.  Thus I'm not real familiar with moving VM instances.
>>
>> But what about a situation where flood waters are rising at one data 
>> center?  How much better would it be to be able to move VM instances 
>> to an alternate data center vs just shutting down the local data 
>> center and letting existing VMS instances at alternate data centers 
>> continue to run?
>>
>> Seems to me to not be much of an advantage, but what do I know?
> 
> I believe VMWare's ability to spin up a VM on a different ESXi server
> is mostly an "within data center" thing. If you have 3 ESXi servers
> and one of them get a hardware problem then VMWare can move the VM"s
> to the remaining two.

There are tools to allow you to do spilt data centre Disaster Recovery.

> 
> In case of a total data center meltdown, then I believe something
> else is needed. But even though OS clustering is still somewhat rare
> then application clustering is very common.
> 

Well you need to have multiple copies of the data. So for mid-range to 
high end sites you can replicate at the SAN level. For smaller sites 
there are solutions that use VMWARE service VMs to replicate the data.

You can replicate to alternate sites, or to an off-site cloud based data 
centre.

There are is also Site Recovery Manager which allows scripting in either 
environment.



> Arne
> 

Dave