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.
Continue reading “Ethernet Storage vs Fibre Channel Storage”
So you’re planning out a single environment around the soon to be released 3.0 version of RHEV. You know you’re going to eventually have multiple environments by the end of the year, and each environment will need to have varying levels of separation. You know you can set up IPtables and SELinux, but that’s host and VM level. VLANs provide additional virtualization, but again, that’s at the network level.
What can we do at the storage level that will support and complement the levels of virtualization and separation found at the compute and network layers that would support multiple RHEV environments? Would this make high availability, scaling out, scaling up, and load balancing more difficult?
What if I told you that you could virtualize a NetApp controller, and thereby answer, “yes” to all of the questions above? Continue reading “Supporting Multiple RHEV 3.0 Environments Simultaneously”