In the previous comparison posts, we took a peek at how RHEV, vSphere, and Hyper-V compared in some cost scenarios as well as major features. In this final installment, we’ll take a look at what I believe is the most important feature. Let me give you a hint:
RHEV does not win here. Yet. Continue reading
Last week, we took a look at some of the cost-related comparisons between RHEV, vSphere, and Hyper-V. That’s all fine and dandy, but to make the most of the comparison, and really put it into perspective, we need to show what you get for the money.
If cost was the only factor, we’d all be driving Kia’s
Today’s post will be the first in a short series of comparisons between RHEV 3, vSphere 5, and Hyper-V. This first post will cover the cost comparison between the 3. And while most of the time I like to wait until the end to announce the overall results, I think you can figure it out on your own that my own bias is towards KVM or KVM-based virtualization. So, in the spirit of “cutting to the chase”:
RHEV FTW!! Woohoo!! End of article!! (Just kidding about the last part.) Continue reading
Man, it’s been forever since I posted anything. At least it feels like it. I’ve actually started a few articles, but my heart wasn’t in the specific topics. I don’t want to write a blog “just to hear myself speak” or just to blather on about trendy buzzwords.
I want to have an impact on the daily life of my fellow technologists, especially those that work with virtualization and storage. Continue reading
Disclaimer – This is actually a re-post of a colleague’s Google+ post. I did not author this, nor am I claiming credit for this. Andrew Cathrow originally posted this on April 8. I just thought enough of it to repost it hear. Additionally, while my preference/bias is clearly slanted towards KVM, VMware does have a solid product. They’re just not up front about their dependencies…
–
VMware has a lot of rather deceptive marketing around KVM and Linux. They have gone to great pains to hide their complete reliance on open source and Linux in particular. You may be saying to yourself “that was in the past but today with ESXi there is no more Linux because they removed the service console”.
You’d be wrong, actually you’d be really, really wrong. Continue reading
I’m happy to announce that TR-3940 has been updated and published! It can be viewed/downloaded at http://www.netapp.com/templates/mediaView?m=tr-3940.pdf&cc=us&wid=126097378&mid=53830923
Captain KVM
I’m happy to announce that I have been invited to speak at the 2012 Red Hat Summit in Boston!! Here are the details:
Deploying Oracle on Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization 3.0 & NetApp
Jon Benedict (Captain KVM) Senior Solutions Architect/TME, NetApp
Karthik Nagalingam Reference Architect, NetApp
Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization 3.0 ups the ante in enterprise-class virtualization and NetApp provides a flexible and high-performance storage platform. Combining these best-of-breed technologies makes for a compelling platform for tier-one applications.
One of the most prevalent tier-one applications is Oracle 11g. In this session, Jon Benedict and Karthik Nagalingam from NetApp will describe how to virtualize an Oracle database on Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization 3.0 and NetApp. They will demonstrate how to:
Summit Track: “In-Depth”
Date: Thursday, June 28, 2012
Time: 4:50pm – 5:50pm
Hope to see you there!!
Hi folks,
I’m happy to report that my updated technical reports around RHEL 6, KVM, and NetApp storage have been published. Whether you are looking for the best practices, how to deploy the best practices, or simply need something to get you to sleep (‘cuz the Ambien isn’t cutting it), these are for you!
TR-3848 RHEL 6, KVM, and NetApp Storage: Best Practices
TR-4034 RHEL 6, KVM, and NetApp Storage: Deployment Guide
Thanks again for following!
CaptainKVM
Hi all,
NetApp TR-3914 was originally released last year to cover the best practices between RHEV 2 and NetApp Data ONTAP 7.3.3. I’ve very happy to announce that the TR has been updated for RHEV 3.0 and NetApp Data ONTAP 8.0.1 (7 mode).
http://media.netapp.com/documents/tr-3914.pdf
Captain KVM
If you’ve followed me at all via my blog, trade shows, or industry whitepapers then you know I work for the storage company with the big blue “N” for a logo. You probably also know how much enjoy working at the the big blue “N”. That being said, I’m about to step away from the party line. And I’ll give you a hint – this article is heavily slanted towards Ethernet.
People ask us all the time, which protocol is best for virtualization? The official answer is “The one(s) that you feel comfortable with, Mr. Customer.” It’s really not a cop out, as we’re actually comfortable with all of them. The truth is that the protocol is not the solution, it’s only the conduit to the goodness that is contained within the storage with the big blue “N”. Here’s where I break from the party.
I don’t like Fibre Channel.