[mythtv-users] Going Virtual and upgrading tuners

[Larry Roberts]

On 7/31/2013 1:17 AM, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 3:27 AM, Phill Edwards <philledwards at gmail.com> wrote:
> .....
>> Apologies if this is stating the bleedin' obvious, but you also need a step
>> to add the NAS into the new VM config. I mention this because if you try to
>> add disk as a storage repository it will trash the contents of the disk (on
>> VMware anyway - you didn't mention which hypervisor you're going to use). I
>> guess if it's an external NAS shared over NFS then you'll be OK, but thought
>> I should point it out just in case.
> I am guessing that anyone with a Project California C-series server,
> and a 10GbE network backend has a NAS out there too :-)  And
> it should be a NetApp(*), just on principals.
>
> Gary
>
> (*) I am still surprised that John did not buy NetApp.  The culture
> fits well, and while EMC may be the 100,000 lbs gorilla, NetApp
> tries harder.
> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
> http://www.mythtv.org/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


When one works for the mothership directly supporting a product its 
sometimes easier (barely) to get gear even if its a generation or so "old".
I wouldn't mind have a small NETAPP at my house other than paying for 
the power to drive it given my light needs.  Cisco actually resold a 
QNAP box for quite a while and I was able to pickup one of those rather 
cheap. Its flashed from Cisco to QNAP firmware and does quite well as a 
NAS box.

As to the NetApp acquisition, well thats a whole nother topic. :) I 
happen to like NetApp and agree with you on culture.  I think its going 
to take EMC making a bigger step in Cisco's sandbox at which point the 
gloves come off.

I say all this with NO inside knowledge so dont take anything as 
"inside" knowledge of a potential deal, just someone who is a bit 
wishful perhaps.