Jack Adama <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 06/10/2007 07:09:44 AM:
> The servers are a variety of domain controllers, file, print, web, SQL,
> IIS, and Exchange servers. The company will NOT move to Linux. There
> was a huge debate over this last year. The only good that came from it
> was if users wanted Linux they could install it themselves, but they
> won't get any support from the company. The statement "The company
> will NOT move the server farm to Linux" was made several times by the
CIO.
> If IBM or someone made something like a mainframe that could run 200+
> virtual Window 2003 R2 enterprise servers (and of course windows 2008
> when it gets released) then they would make a lot of money.
> The problem is the datacenter is out of electricity. My thinking is a
> mainframe has to be more power efficient than the current 200 rack
> mounted servers, KVMs, various tape backups, monitors, etc. There are
> plans for 200+ more servers once the power problem is addressed.
Based on your criteria, I think you've got six options (or some combination
of these six), not necessarily in order:
1. There's an operating system called z/OS which is extremely power
efficient and thoroughly virtualized. It happens to run on mainframes, even
small ones. The following services could probably be merged onto a single
z/OS mainframe (or perhaps two, with one in your disaster recovery data
center): domain controllers/file/print (SMB, LPD, etc.), Web (might need
more details here), and SQL (i.e. migrating what you can to DB2 for z/OS).
IIS is not supported but unless you're using IIS for something very
Windows-specific there are close substitutes such as the IBM HTTP Server
and Apache HTTP Server for z/OS. Microsoft Exchange servers are not
supported on z/OS nor am I aware of any direct substitutes. (Someone can
correct me on that if I'm mistaken.) An indirect substitute is Lotus Domino
for z/OS, possibly with the Outlook client ("DAMO") if you need to support
Outlook users.
2. Blade servers and virtualization software. IBM Blade Center servers with
Tivoli provisioning software, for example. This is currently the best you
can achieve (power/space) for Microsoft Windows in a data center.
3. Fewer servers, e.g. consolidating multiple file/print servers onto fewer
OS images. Security restrictions may be one impediment here.
4. Add more electrical power to your data center, and beef up the cooling.
This will likely be extremely expensive and will contribute to global
warming, and you'll probably get to do it again (or build an expensive new
data center) before too long. :-(
5. Other non-Linux platforms which offer at least some potential
consolidation benefits, such as i5/OS (System i) or UNIX (e.g. AIX and
System p LPARs).
6. CIO acts rationally, or you find a new CIO. :-)
The fundamental problem is that Microsoft Windows isn't particularly power-
or space-efficient, so if you have a space/power/cooling problem, well....
:-)
Good luck!
- - - - -
Timothy Sipples
IBM Consulting Enterprise Software Architect
Specializing in Software Architectures Related to System z
Based in Tokyo, Serving IBM Japan and IBM Asia-Pacific
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
