Comments on: Size Labels for Virtual Environments – A Proposal

By: Bob Plankers

Bob Plankers — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 19:21:05 +0000

@Chris, I’ve been mulling over a “complexity rating” as well, and I think hosts would fit into that.

@Aaron, my original label for 100k was “Wow.” Then I changed it to “Crazy.” Finally I settled on “Giant.” Realistically, I’m speculating that a place with 100k VMs isn’t likely to advertise that they have that many.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 13:28:34 +0000

Wow, 100k VMs. I’d like to see that. :) Maybe EC2? Who else would have that?

By: Chris

Chris — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 10:16:08 +0000

What about factoring in the number of hosts too?

Oh…that will make Hyper-V installations seem “bigger” than VMware installations with the same number of VMs as more hosts are required with Hyper-V and then MS will jump on the fact that they have “bigger” installations than VMware :-)