On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 1:58 PM, Bo Lynch <blynch at ameliaschools.com> wrote: > On Thu, February 4, 2010 6:18 pm, Drew wrote: >>> Right know we have about 30 or so linux servers scattered through out or >>> district. Was looking at ways of consolidating and some sort of >>> redundancy >>> would be nice. >> >> I'm in the process of going through something like that right now. The >> solution we're pursuing is to virtualize our existing physical servers >> in virtual machines and consolidating those VM's on a smaller number >> of larger servers. >> >> The tools we're using allow us to keep a warm copy of a VM on >> redundant server and if we lose an entire server we're up within >> 3-5min with minimal data loss. As the servers we're installing have >> VMware ESXi embedded in the server and storage is pulled from >> redundant iSCSI backends, data loss due to server failure is minimal. >> And as part of the backup process includes regular off-site backups of >> the data and VMs to another office we can, in theory, lose an entire >> building and still continue to function. >> >> >> -- >> Drew >> >> > Thanks for the info. Looks like VM would be the way to go. I have been > looking at Vmware and virtualbox. Would you recommend Vmware over > virtualbox? > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > AFAIK, virtualbox is desktop only virtualization while vmware has more offering (desktop, server, cloud etc) -- Athmane Madjoudj