I have noticed that IT managers have different ideas about active/active datacenters with respect to virtualization. It looks alien to some and some are confused on how to implement or whether to go for Active/Passive or Active/Active datacenters. I have tried to present it in a simple terminology:
I don't think that your solution as you explain it offers load balancing. Also, data replication needs more explanation and series thought as in these cases it may the main bottleneck!!!
Hi George, Thanks for the feedback. Which solution you recken does not offer load balancing?
I tried to keep the discussion general and not product specific. Providing details on the data replication was not the subject here, which is a different topic. In short data replication can be managed with software tools to replicate between hosts (tools form Symantec, EMC, vCenter, IBM, HP etc) but the preferred solution is thru storage level replication handled by the storage native tools e.g. HP, EMC, Netapp etc have their own replication tools to replicate between different storage arrays.
I tried to look at your Google Docs document but found that I do not have access. I sent the request for access and would be happy to review your architecture.
|
My Subscription |
My Forums |
Address Book |
Member List |
Search |
FAQ |
Ticket List |
Log Out
Printable Version
All Forums >> [General Virtualization Topics] >> Server Virtualization >> Active/Active Datacenters Simplified 
Active/Active Datacenters Simplified - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread