SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD)
AMD 259.65+2.3%Jan 23 9:30 AM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (230819)4/20/2007 8:10:40 PM
From: pgerassiRead Replies (2) of 275872
 
Dear Tench:

4 socket servers are the trend for server consolidation via virtualization. Why have dozens of 1P and 2P servers when you can have just a few 4P servers running. Management, backups and support is much cheaper on 5 4P servers than 50 1P and 2P servers. If a majority of your virtual servers run Oracle for example, you can save lots of money by having 20P of licenses rather than 75P of them. That alone can be much more than the cost of 5 4P servers. It is also much more reliable as virtual servers can be moved among the physical servers from broken, updating or maintenance scheduled ones to active ones. They can be moved back when done. This way you can keep running even during repairs or upgrades.

You can also make virtual servers larger or smaller depending on demand. Like Intuit, if they were consolidated on a few big servers, the E-File virtual server could be expanded to handle the flood of requests while the other virtual servers are cut back to make more resources available. When the flood is over, the E-File virtual server could be cut back to the normal size.

Whats more likely to happen is that x86-64 servers will get larger. Its an axiom, work expands to soak up idle cycles. Just like the corollary, storage needs expand to use available storage.

Pete
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext