Skip to main content

VMware a godsend for Catholic Charities



Would this fit in with the CSR? It sure does make make a lot of difference.

Catholic Charities' outmoded, hand-me-down tower and rack servers were difficult to manage, had almost no power redundancy and were totally power inefficient, said Eric Johnson, Catholic Charities IT project manager.

Never mind the cooling, because there was none. Unless you count opening windows and using oscillating floor fans on the high setting to circulate the air.

With network servers at only the largest sites but also with employees scattered at the organization's 40 locations, employees didn't have access to files stored at the Hub site. There was an urgent need to centralize IT operations and provide consistent access on a highly available system.

The IT staff had no experience with a storage area network (SAN), so all data was previously stored separately on individual servers, only complicating disaster recovery measures. With the addition of a SAN, new blade servers and a uniform infrastructure, Catholic Charities can now make good on the disaster recovery mandates of its state contracts.


Bridget reporting...

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Security: VMware Workstation 6 vulnerability

vulnerable software: VMware Workstation 6.0 for Windows, possible some other VMware products as well type of vulnerability: DoS, potential privilege escalation I found a vulnerability in VMware Workstation 6.0 which allows an unprivileged user in the host OS to crash the system and potentially run arbitrary code with kernel privileges. The issue is in the vmstor-60 driver, which is supposed to mount VMware images within the host OS. When sending the IOCTL code FsSetVoleInformation with subcode FsSetFileInformation with a large buffer and underreporting its size to at max 1024 bytes, it will underrun and potentially execute arbitrary code. Security focus
Post a Comment
Read more

OS Virtualization comparison: Parallels' Virtuozzo vs the rest

Virtuozzo's main differentiators versus hypervisors center on overhead, virtualization flexibility, administration and cost. Virtuozzo requires significantly less overhead than hypervisor solutions, generally in the range of 1% to 5% compared with 7% to 25% for most hypervisors, leaving more of the system available to run user workloads. Customers can also virtualize a wider range of applications using Virtuozzo, including transactional databases, which often suffer from performance problems when used with hypervisors. On the administration side, customers need to manage, maintain and secure just a single OS instance, while the hypervisor model requires customers to manage many OS instances. Of course, the hypervisor vendors have worked hard to automate much of this process, but it still requires more effort to manage and maintain multiple operating systems than a single instance. Finally, OS virtualization with Virtuozzo has a lower list price than the leading hypervisor for comme...
Post a Comment
Read more