I've run many DC + SQL boxes with VZ. It works very well. I've never virtualized Exchange. Call me old-school. :-P
VZ doesn't share files or memory between VPS instances. Not in the default configuration, anyway. CPU is shared in all virtualization scenarios that I know of...be it VZ, VMWare, Hyper-V... Regards, Michael B. Smith MCITP:SA,EMA/MCSE/Exchange MVP http://TheEssentialExchange.com -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2008 10:06 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: Virtuozzo Migration I basically translate that as closed system vs open system. Anything that cannot interoperate in the same code base requires hardware virtualization, anything that can share files, memory and CPU in the same set of code can run OS Virtualization. I do agree that I think VMware gives you some substancial benefits. I am curious if anyone is running DC, Exchange, SQL on the same box in a Virtuozzo scenario(assuming powerful enough box, SAS drives, etc) and not seeing the performance issues that many would coorelate with running them on a VMWARE or Virtual Server box. Many of the forums seem to indicate that Virtuozzo excels here.. again depends on the arena. Too many ways to skin a cat..Time to goto sleep. Thanks for the insights. I appreciate it. -----Original Message----- From: Phil Brutsche [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2008 9:02 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: Virtuozzo Migration It's not that Virtuozzo limits you to a particular SW platform, it limits you to ONE specific operating system release on ONE CPU architecture. If you choose to use 64-bit Server 2003 Enterprise R2 in your containers, that's what you're stuck with. If you need something else (say, 32-bit Server 2003 Standard R2) you need a new virtualization server, or forgo virualization altogether for that one machine. To give you something to compare it to, Virtuozzo is similar in concept to FreeBSD jails and Solaris containers. VMware ESX may be less efficient than VZ, but you gain infinitely more flexibility. I've personally run 64-bit Linux, 32-bit Linux, 64-bit 2003, 32-bit 2003, and 32-bit NetBSD on an ESX box at the same time... can't do that with VZ. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > So far it seems that the proc and memory mgmt in VZ is better than > VMWare, so why would a company consolidating servers or looking for > expansion go with VMWare over VZ if they are staying all on the same SW > platform? -- Phil Brutsche [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
