|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 19 post(s) |
Doctor Ungabungas
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
   |
Posted - 2010.06.16 21:40:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: CCP Yokai
"why not have a huge VM array?"
We get this question a lot and the answer is pretty simple. Think of a server, even a very big one as a loaf of bread. Each time you make a slice you leave some crumbs behind (the overhead of VMÆs) no matter how small or efficient the slicing the fact is you donÆt get the peak capacity you could if it were dedicated to the one service.
You don't consider the ability to seamlessly transfer nodes to new hardware and dynamically reallocate resources to struggling nodes worthwhile?
Rather than buying all that IBM hardware you should have sat down with an IBM consulting team and figured out how you can improve your product.
|
Doctor Ungabungas
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2010.06.16 21:53:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Forum Alterson
It's annoying how hard Virtualization has been pushed, that people think it's a solution everyone needs. VMs are great if you want to buy large hardware, to run multiple server instances. If the EVE Server Application moves nodes between servers to load balance, what could they possibly gain by adding a Hypervisor overhead on-top of that?
It's pretty clear that the Eve Server Application doesn't do anything under load except fail. (The NC are being Y-2'd even as we speak.)
|
Doctor Ungabungas
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2010.06.16 22:53:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Barakkus
This is what I've been beating into my boss' head for the last 2 years. He found out about virtualization and he wanted to virtualize EVERYTHING in the office...I fought tooth and nail to keep some things on dedicated servers. Had to do the same thing when he found out about iSCSI...he figured a heavily loaded Exchange server and PostgreSQL server would be great on iSCSI 
I used to run a fifty thousand user exchange 2k3 cluster on iSCSI, it works like a dream. [Compared to the alternative.]
|
Doctor Ungabungas
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2010.06.23 21:40:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Rasz Lin
they use Microsoft ....
That hasn't been a valid reason for a daily downtime since NT4.
|
Doctor Ungabungas
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2010.06.23 21:47:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Hunter Stevens
the backout procedure is executed
A data centre move is more of a 'fix on fail' change than a backout.
|
Doctor Ungabungas
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2010.06.23 22:38:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Bagehi
Originally by: schoralous
CCP has been online long enough and makes enough money monthly to actually have an IT department that is professional and acts professionally. Nowhere I have ever worked, from the largest company to the smallest would I still have a job if I had even 1 DT go the way CCP's always go!
Have you ever migrated servers before? Regardless of their estimates, I was expecting 24-48 hours.
I said the same thing about 4 hours ago. Moving a server environment like TQ to a new data centre is a two day job unless you're doing a cut over or you are fond of incredibly optimistic timelines and having your staff work unplanned overtime.
|
|
|
| |
|