directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John E. Conlon" <jcon...@verticon.com>
Subject Re: [OT] VMware ESX + BEA Liquid VM
Date Mon, 26 Mar 2007 18:23:26 GMT
Hi Enrique,

Enrique Rodriguez wrote:
> Hi, Directory developers,
>
> I've been meaning to ask the list if anyone had been following this
> topic; other articles are available if you Google:
>
> "With VMware's help, BEA ditches the operating system" (URL may wrap)
> http://searchservervirtualization.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid94_gci1234289,00.html

>
>
Sounds good, but will it be Open Source?
> I've worked a decent amount with VMware and Xen running infrastructure
> services.  If not specifically any of the aforementioned vendors, then
> at least this model (VM tight to the hardware) has a lot of merit;
> partly for performance but mostly for management.
>
> I also think it has a big role to play in what we're trying to do at
> the Directory project.  For a long time I thought JNode was the answer
> here, but this "operating system-less" model is even tighter.  
Why is so different between BEAs offering and JNode other than offering 
the ability of the running the BEA JVM alongside partitions with full 
OSes.  

In spite of the BEA offering instead of eliminating the JNODE  I could 
see why the following three options could all still apply to ADS.

1.  for a Dedicated appliance server = JNODE + ADS
2.  for a Multipurpose Desktop =  Native OS + JVM + ADS
3.  for a Dedicated server = VMWare + BEA Liquid JVM + ADS

 From our stand point, being Java based do we care which of the 3 
alternatives are chosen by our users?

John

Mime
View raw message