<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:clearspace="http://www.jivesoftware.com/xmlns/clearspace/rss" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:opensearch="http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearch/1.1/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Manual Automation</title>
    <link>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ManualAutomation</link>
    <description>Comment Feed for Manual Automation on post 'Bye, Bye ESXi'</description>
    <pubDate>Sat, 05 Sep 2009 19:01:24 GMT</pubDate>
    <generator>Clearspace 1.10.12 (http://jivesoftware.com/products/clearspace/)</generator>
    <dc:date>2009-09-05T19:01:24Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>RE:&amp;nbsp;Bye, Bye ESXi</title>
      <link>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ManualAutomation/2009/05/20/bye-bye-esxi#comments-12237</link>
      <description>I actually did some HA testing not long ago using ESXi and a common scratch datastore, worked fine. I have been running HA clusters like this since U1 without a problem. Haven't had alot of failing hosts though &lt;img class="jive-emoticon" border="0" src="http://communities.vmware.com/images/emoticons/happy.gif" alt=":-)" /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 22:51:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>Christian</author>
      <guid>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ManualAutomation/2009/05/20/bye-bye-esxi#comments-12237</guid>
      <dc:date>2009-08-28T22:51:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RE:&amp;nbsp;Bye, Bye ESXi</title>
      <link>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ManualAutomation/2009/05/20/bye-bye-esxi#comments-12197</link>
      <description>"No need for separate datastores" - Yep, I thought that too, HA even seemed to work initially.  But then I read this: &lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://virtualgeek.typepad.com/virtual_geek/2009/01/updated-homebrew-esx-hardware-list.html"&gt;http://virtualgeek.typepad.com/virtual_geek/2009/01/updated-homebrew-esx-hardware-list.html&lt;/a&gt; (do a search on the work "scratch"). They may have changed this with update 4, not sure since I'm now running the ESX edition.  Did you test the HA capability?  I'd assume nothing.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I believe you're right in the HP would support ESXi U4 and future updates, but their support for CIM management providers is terrible.  According to Stu at vinternals, HP is dropping ESXi embedded part so you'll have purchase a USB stick, d/l and install the image from HP yourself - not very good support compared to Dell and IBM: &lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://vinternals.com/2009/08/no-more-hp-esxi-embedded/"&gt;http://vinternals.com/2009/08/no-more-hp-esxi-embedded/&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
If you're running Dell or IBM hardware then by all means seriously consider the ESXi edition.  It is supposedly the future direction of VMware (of course I heard this last year too).  My opinion is that VMware will do what customers want, meaning that the ESX edition will not be going away any time soon.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I have to say that so far my production ESXi hosts have been rock solid including the HA, DRS and SRM features/add-ons and with the Insight Agent installed in the COS.</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2009 01:53:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>Virtual_JTW</author>
      <guid>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ManualAutomation/2009/05/20/bye-bye-esxi#comments-12197</guid>
      <dc:date>2009-08-26T01:53:31Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RE:&amp;nbsp;Bye, Bye ESXi</title>
      <link>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ManualAutomation/2009/05/20/bye-bye-esxi#comments-12158</link>
      <description>A couple of comments...&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
"Unlike ESX Classic, HA in ESXi requires a ScratchConfig folder created on separate VMFS datastores for each host."&lt;br /&gt;
  No need for separate datastores, just add a subfolder for each ESXi.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
"1. HP only supports ESXi with the proper "management providers" on Update 2 and Update 3 (as evidenced by VMware's downloads section of their web site). ESXi 3.5 Update 4 is not yet supported."&lt;br /&gt;
  I get support on ESX 3.5 U4 from HP, no problems or indications that U4 (or any other update) would be unsupported. The first suggestion from the support is usually to update to the latest patch release. &lt;img class="jive-emoticon" border="0" src="http://communities.vmware.com/images/emoticons/happy.gif" alt=":-)" /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
"2. Using VMware Update Manger to upgrade ESXi instances to Update 4 effectively breaks SIM manageability."&lt;br /&gt;
  This is fixed by applying a CIM provider patch available from HP (&lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://h20000.www2.hp.com/bizsupport/TechSupport/Document.jsp?objectID=c01813700&amp;#38;lang=en&amp;#38;cc=us&amp;#38;taskId=101&amp;#38;prodSeriesId=420496&amp;#38;prodTypeId=18964"&gt;http://h20000.www2.hp.com/bizsupport/TechSupport/Document.jsp?objectID=c01813700&amp;#38;lang=en&amp;#38;cc=us&amp;#38;taskId=101&amp;#38;prodSeriesId=420496&amp;#38;prodTypeId=18964&lt;/a&gt;)</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 23 Aug 2009 17:31:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>Christian</author>
      <guid>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ManualAutomation/2009/05/20/bye-bye-esxi#comments-12158</guid>
      <dc:date>2009-08-23T17:31:04Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

