Skip to main content

File Virtualization: Doing it right

George has some pointers...

The next frontier in virtualisation is upon us; we have the technology, and there is a genuine need for it. So are you ready to deliver? We've already seen the absolute dominance of server virtualisation by VMware. We have seen companies like Compellent and 3PAR do what many thought was impossible -- carve out a share of the primary storage market through their storage virtualisation and thin provisioning capabilities. The next frontier in storage virtualisation is file virtualisation on network-attached storage (NAS) systems.

NAS-based file virtualisation promises to be useful, as it solves real file management problems, with immediate ROI.

In the 1990s, one of the more common conversations was how to protect databases. Oracle and other databases were experiencing a big ramp-up, and keeping them protected was critical. While database protection continues to be a productive market, organisations have begun focusing on managing unstructured data.


Read the rest
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