March 2001


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mike Austin <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Departmental Technology Coordinators <[log in to unmask]>
Tue, 13 Mar 2001 11:00:29 -0500
TEXT/PLAIN (42 lines)
On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Steve Cavrak wrote:

> - zoo may not be able to run particular
>   applications at all.

Agreed, however it depends on what applications they need.  For file and
web services, Zoo very well may fit the bill.

> - zoo may be able to run the application
>   but for policy reasons does not

There aren't many policy reasons that I'm aware of that would make us not
run a certain application.  We try to be accomodating and allow people to
run applications that are will run in our environment if they want.

> - zoo may be able to run the application but
>   at a less than desired service level

Our uptime has been extremely high since we implimented the new mail and
web servers.

> - zoo may be able to do it, but at the cost
>   of outsourcing a stragic resource to the
>   group.

The cost of running and maintaining your own servers is usually very high.
Dealing with upgrades, security issues, and hardware failures can be
extremely costly for departments.  If the services they need are offered
centrally, it seems like a waste of UVM's limited resources to duplicate
those efforts.  If they have specific needs that we can't meet, then we
should talk about those needs to see if they can be met.  If not, then
they should "roll their own" servers, but not without considering
centrally run options.

> It's that old "all the eggs in one basket" delimmma.

Exactly, which is why departmental servers so often have problems.  They
put all their data on one or two machines.  Then they don't back it up
effectively, and don't use redundant hardware.