Re: Virtualization vs. sharing a server

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Michael Gould wrote:

I don't know why virtualization is considered a no-no...Since these are all quad core with 32 gig running Windows 2003 64 bit, we can run about 100 users concurrently on each application server before we start to see a strain.


You answered your own question here. Ramiro is looking for suggestions for how to scale up to >500 connections at once, and it's not that likely virtualization can fill any useful role in that context. If you're happy with 100, sure you can deploy on VMware ESX and have that work. There are performance vs. manageability tradeoffs when deciding if virtualized deployment makes sense, and for smaller workloads it's easy to dismiss the performance side of things as not a limiting factor and therefore favor VMs.

--
Greg Smith  2ndQuadrant US  Baltimore, MD
PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx   www.2ndQuadrant.us


--
Sent via pgsql-admin mailing list (pgsql-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-admin

[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux