If you follow the blogs, there has been an extensive debate about VMotion Vs QuickMigrate. In a classic case of moving the goal posts Microsoft has responded on their virtualization blog.
David Marshall has a round up the various attempts to nail this. Initially, this debate started as well meaning attempt to see if VMotion compared to QuickMigrate produces an apples to apples, or an apples to oranges result.
The answer. When VMs are moved with QuickMigrate, users are disconnected. With VMotion they are not. End of story.
Faced with this revelation, Microsoft has adopted a calculated campaign of disinformation and misinformation. You will be shocked to discover that VMotion is not a DR technology. But you see It never was intend to be. It’s uptime tool, design to assist in faciliating maintanance mode like situations – and when coupled to DRS automates load-balancing. You see Microsoft are acusing VMware of producing technology that does what it says in the book. Perhaps Microsoft should take a leaf out of VMware’s book for a change! Does Microsoft dare to claim that QuickMigrate is different and is there for availablity. I think not, because you should never take a hammer to job of spanner.
They then move the argument on to HA, which was never part of the original comparison. This is a very common strategy used polemists and politicans the world over. When you have lost the argument – create a new one. Perhaps you audience with dust in their eyes will not notice how so pitifully lost the original argument. So hay-ho start another argument which is tangentially related. So HA is not Continious HA. Agreed. That’s why VMware have been working on continious HA as demo’d at VMworld 2007. The founder of VMware pulled out the power – and the VM just kept running on another ESX host.
The real argument should be about Continious HA vS MSCS.