1 Reply Latest reply on Jan 2, 2007 3:03 PM by vmakhija


    DougBaer Master
    VMware Employees

      It would be nice to have VM appliances available for many of the workloads described in the test.  This would reduce the possible variation in the results due to configuration differences within the VMs (patch levels, versions, etc).  I realize this might not be possible with the Windows-based VMs, but how about the RHEL VMs?  It is probably too much to ask that the vendors in question provide temporary benchmark licenses for such pre-configured appliances in order to provide standardized building blocks for the metrics. 


      The investment in time to create these VMs is pretty significant and seems to require a bit of cross-platform expertise.  Not that this is a bad thing, but it may limit the number of folks able to run the tests.


      That being said, I can tell that a lot of time and energy has gone into creating this benchmark -- and document.


      My two cents -- thrown in to seed the pot.



        • 1. Re: Standardization?



          Thanks for your comments. Indeed it would be nice to have pre-configured VMs, but as you point out the licensing restrictions prevent that. For the RHEL VMs we are looking into ways of improving the setup time, but even there the applications (Oracle, SPECweb etc.) would still have to be installed by the end user.


          Luckily, the investment in time for the VM creation is a one time cost. We have found that the cost of creating additional tiles is much less compared to the first tile as most of the existing VMs can be cloned and their configuration modified (as opposed to creating everything from scratch).


          Additionally, some of our partners have even cloned the clients to further reduce setup time for additional tiles.  Having said that though, we are continuing to look into ways to reduce the setup time.