Re: [PLUG] small business server virtualization?

From: "Tone Montone" <tonemontone@gmail.com>
To: "Philadelphia Linux User's Group Discussion List" <plug@lists.phillylinux.org>
Sent: Monday, November 6, 2017 11:20:05 PM
Subject: Re: [PLUG] small business server virtualization?

Greg,
First, I think KVM supports Windows. At least it's available in my drop-down menu. Server-2012, Windows-10, etc.

Second, could you virtualize the application rather than the operating environment? i.e. Could you use Docker to perform the virtualization of the application? I am not an expert on Docker, but I thought that was why it's found to be useful. Instead of having many VMs, patching, etc. you only have to deal with the application and what it needs, so you can have 100 individual httpd docker containers, all with their own IPs, configs, etc. You can snapshot them, restore, deliver, etc. Just a though.

Yes you can, but it costs money to re-design. So a business looks the cost of redesign, and then the cost to manage 100 separate containers instead of just 1 VM

and it's not clear that you win anything. Of course the developers work is now easier - with no dependencies to worry about, but this is just throwing the problem over

the wall where it increases the cost of operations.

Good luck,

Mike

On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 1:08 PM, Greg Helledy <gregsonh@gra-inc.com> wrote:
Does the overhead of virtualization make sense for small organizations? We have various applications running on two physical servers and run into the situation where two or more applications need Apache so configuration of one potentially interferes with configuration of another. And likewise, upgrades or maintenance of one application require the server to be taken offline for a while, cutting off access to others.
Can it make sense to virtualize so that each application has its own OS instance, which can be powered on and off, upgraded, etc. independently, for a small business?

It looks like VMWare's vSphere Essentials would run us $500 or so a year, is it worth it to pay that? What's the best alternative as a bare-metal hypervisor, Xen? KVM is a no-go because we have to be able to do Windows servers, too.
--
Greg Helledy
GRA, Incorporated
P: +1 215-884-7500
F: +1 215-884-1385
www.gra.aero
___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug

___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug

"Between subtle shading and the absence of light lies the nuance of iqlusion..." - Kryptos

Lee Marzke, lee@marzke.net http://marzke.net/lee/
IT Consultant, VMware, VCenter, SAN storage, infrastructure, SW CM
+1 800-393-5217 office

+1 484-348-2230 fax