<?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>Virtualization Edge</title>
    <link>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead</link>
    <description>Virtualization on the Edge</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:55:00 GMT</pubDate>
    <generator>Clearspace 1.10.12 (http://jivesoftware.com/products/clearspace/)</generator>
    <dc:date>2008-07-09T16:55:00Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>New Performance Data on 2-Socket vs 4-Socket</title>
      <link>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/2008/07/09/new-performance-data-on-2socket-vs-4socket</link>
      <description>In the past I was somewhat biased towards &lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.delltechcenter.com/page/Advantages+of+Dell+Servers+over+HP+for+Virtualization"&gt;2-socket servers for virtualization&lt;/a&gt; - which was due to the results of some testing we did. I had of course realized over the past year or so that things had changed and the 4-socket servers were now more competitive. So when I ran the series of chats on &lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.delltechcenter.com/page/Selecting+a+Server+for+Virtualization"&gt;Selecting a Server for Virtualization&lt;/a&gt;, I decided that it was a good opportunity to re-run some of those exact same tests with the brand new R900 that had arrived in the lab. I posted the results on a TechCenter page so you can &lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.delltechcenter.com/page/Update+on+2-Socket+and+4-Socket+Servers+for+Virtualization"&gt;see the full results&lt;/a&gt;, but the short summary is that the R900 stacks up as more efficient than the 2950 we tested in the previous paper. The R900 showed 10 to 23 percent better performance per watt than the older 2950. The question that remains is how would the R900 compare to a current generation 2950?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Todd</description>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">delltechcenter</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">2-socket</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">4-socket</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">virtualization</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">esx</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">2950</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">r900</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">poweredge</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">performance</category>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:55:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>ToddMuirhead</author>
      <guid>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/2008/07/09/new-performance-data-on-2socket-vs-4socket</guid>
      <dc:date>2008-07-09T16:55:00Z</dc:date>
      <clearspace:dateToText>1 year, 4 months ago</clearspace:dateToText>
      <wfw:comment>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/comment/new-performance-data-on-2socket-vs-4socket</wfw:comment>
      <wfw:commentRss>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/feeds/comments?blogPostID=1923</wfw:commentRss>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Bumping Into It on VMTN</title>
      <link>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/2008/05/20/bumping-into-it-on-vmtn</link>
      <description>I just ran into a thread on VMTN that is exactly what we are hosting a &lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.delltechcenter.com/page/05-20-08+-+Selecting+a+Virtualization+Server+Chat"&gt;chat&lt;/a&gt; on later today. The VMTN thread is titled &lt;a class="jive-link-message" href="http://communities.vmware.com/message/949259#949259"&gt;Physical Hardware Recommendation&lt;/a&gt;, but I am calling the same topic &lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.delltechcenter.com/page/Selecting+a+Server+for+Virtualization"&gt;Selecting a Virtualization Server&lt;/a&gt;. Very coincidental that this thread was started today and it even specifically asks about 2950s and R900s. So for the record - this VMTN thread was not a planted thread by me or some secret Dell &lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/magazine/15-11/st_best"&gt;conspiracy&lt;/a&gt;. I do have to confess that it was &lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.delltechcenter.com/account/scott_hanson"&gt;Scott&lt;/a&gt; that spotted this thread first and he deserves the credit (Again!).&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Todd</description>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">2-socket</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">4-socket</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">blades</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">r805</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">r900</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">r905</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">2950</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">2950iii</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">selection</category>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 19:31:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>ToddMuirhead</author>
      <guid>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/2008/05/20/bumping-into-it-on-vmtn</guid>
      <dc:date>2008-05-20T19:31:00Z</dc:date>
      <clearspace:dateToText>1 year, 6 months ago</clearspace:dateToText>
      <wfw:comment>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/comment/bumping-into-it-on-vmtn</wfw:comment>
      <wfw:commentRss>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/feeds/comments?blogPostID=1767</wfw:commentRss>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Best Server for You</title>
      <link>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/2008/05/19/the-best-server-for-you</link>
      <description>For the past three weeks, we at the Dell TechCenter have been focused on the &lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.delltechcenter.com/page/Switching+to+Dell+Systems+Management"&gt;decoder ring&lt;/a&gt; for systems management. Starting today we are going to tell you what the &lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.delltechcenter.com/page/Selecting+a+Server+for+Virtualization"&gt;best server is for virtualization&lt;/a&gt;. The reason it is going to take three weeks is that the answer for everybody is different. So we are going to talk about key factors, advantages of one type of server over another, and learn from the decisions and thought processes of each other. We are simply hosting the conversation and I do not have a "favorite server" -- although I must &lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.delltechcenter.com/page/Advantages+of+Dell+Servers+over+HP+for+Virtualization"&gt;admit&lt;/a&gt; that I used to lean heavily towards 2-socket servers. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The decision for most seems to come down to &lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/pedge_r805?c=us&amp;#38;cs=04&amp;#38;l=en&amp;#38;s=bsd"&gt;2-socket&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/pedge_r900?c=us&amp;#38;cs=04&amp;#38;l=en&amp;#38;s=bsd"&gt;4-socket&lt;/a&gt;, or &lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/pedge_m1000e?c=us&amp;#38;cs=04&amp;#38;l=en&amp;#38;s=bsd"&gt;blades&lt;/a&gt; servers. I hope that we end up expanding the conversation and talk about lots of other possibilities including &lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.dell.com/content/products/category.aspx/equallogic?c=us&amp;#38;cs=04&amp;#38;l=en&amp;#38;s=bsd"&gt;storage&lt;/a&gt; options, hypervisor options, and who knows what else.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
In order to get things going are going to have some &lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.delltechcenter.com/page/Chat+Topics+and+Transcr+ipts"&gt;chat sessions&lt;/a&gt;, there is a &lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.delltechcenter.com/page/Selecting+a+Server+for+Virtualization"&gt;topic home page&lt;/a&gt;, and a &lt;a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.delltechcenter.com/page/Virtualization+Server+Decision+Matrix"&gt;server selection matrix&lt;/a&gt; page to specifically lay out the facts about each type of server. I've started the page off with 2-socket, 4-socket, and blades as server categories with some basic tech specs and advantages for each type. This page will grow as additional pros, cons, and others ideas come up. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Todd</description>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">2-socket</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">4-socket</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">blades</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">delltechcenter</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">esx</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">hypervisor</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">r805</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">r905</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">r900</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">2950</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">m600</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">m605</category>
      <category domain="http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/tags">10000e</category>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 12:20:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <author>ToddMuirhead</author>
      <guid>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/2008/05/19/the-best-server-for-you</guid>
      <dc:date>2008-05-19T12:20:00Z</dc:date>
      <clearspace:dateToText>1 year, 6 months ago</clearspace:dateToText>
      <wfw:comment>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/comment/the-best-server-for-you</wfw:comment>
      <wfw:commentRss>http://communities.vmware.com/blogs/ToddMuirhead/feeds/comments?blogPostID=1759</wfw:commentRss>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

