Nintendo kicks off 'Crowdfarter' promo for Game & Wario
Narco Terror announced from Deep Silver
Call of Duty: Ghosts teaser gives tenuous look at next-gen COD
OZombie will be Spicy Horse's take on Oz
Deadpool listed for Wii U on Amazon Canada
CastleStorm assaulting XBLA next week
Leisure Suit Larry HD delayed until late June
Rhode Island looking to sell Amalur intellectual property
Resident Evil: Revelations DLC coming throughout June
Seeing Red: A History of the Xbox 360's Red Ring of Death
Evening Reading
by Brian Leahy, Sep 08, 2010 5:00pm PDTSimilar to StarCraft II, I've begun publishing multiplayer guides for Halo: Reach, which comes out next week. Are these things you enjoy reading? It's a bit selective as it requires a good amount of proficiency at a game to be able to write a guide, but it's definitely something the Shacknews team can look into producing for new games moving forward... if we happen to be skilled at them.
What other games would you like to see guides written for?
Gaming News o'the Day
- Big, expensive Kinect bundle announced.
- Blizzard releases its first official custom map for SCII.
- Square Enix working on a new Dissidia game.
- BF:BC2 Vietnam will be showcased at TGS 2010.
Links from Morning Discussion
I'm virtualising our entire system to VM's. The plan is i'll be setting up our existing 'VMWARE Server 2' Servers to ESXi 4.1. We'll have 3 and that will allow us to only need to buy the Vmware Essentials Kit.
Main thing, Backups. What is the best way to backup these. I found something online called 'esXpress'. It seemed puuurfeect. But then I encountered some errors and apparently it doesn't support ESXi.
Anyway, anyone have a different backup technique?
Thread Truncated. Click to see all 32 replies.
There really isn't much overhead using a hypervisor like ESX (running vmware server installed onto another machine may be different)
We have a bunch of crappy proprietary software that doesn't play nice together, so rather than assign each of these servers to it's own physical box where it'll use about 2% of the available CPU and other resources, it's far more economical to run them all in their own VMs on the same physical box.
There's also the 'portability' aspect, if something happens and I need to do something to the physical box, I can just move the VMs over to somewhere else while keeping them running and do whatever I have to do (maybe a critical bios update or replace some part that failed) and then move them back when I'm done, without any service interruptions.
Regarding your second point, they've been around in fairly widespread deployment for some time, but I think recently the tech has matured to the point where a lot of people are comfortable using it, especially in this climate of 'do more with less' (see the utilization point above). As far as the default model of a computer goes, we virtualize most stuff we deploy (on the server side) unless there's a very good reason not to. But you have to have the infrastructure to support it and I'm not sure that everyone does.
You must be logged in to post.