This is what I think we would need, but I'm neither inclined to figure that out, nor do I want any additional equipment (VM or otherwise [MS recommends physical for this?!]) to do this. . .

@scottalanmiller said in Azure Warm Backup Site: @IRJ said in Azure Warm Backup Site: Both places had under 250 employees and had offside data centers. But had on prem for their primary workloads? We had a very old core that only supported a few apps and none of them were SaaS at the time

It is because of this licensing discrepency that we know that CloudAtCost was running a scam. They advertised Windows servers that were unlicensed, and unlicensable.

@dafyre said in Its is okay to sync/delete often from Cloud Storage?: @scottalanmiller said in Its is okay to sync/delete often from Cloud Storage?: I don't believe that there is any charge for Wasabi deletions. From what I can tell, Wasabi only charges for storage. There are no egress or deletion fees. Correct, same here. Unless you have the old accounts where they did charge for egress.

@jaredbusch Right. The datastores are at the hypervisor level. The vmdks would be on respective datastores and then in the VM, they would be also be shown as separate disks.

@travisdh1 said in No Data Centres Plan for Western Australian Government: @nadnerB Wow, just your highlights here read like a long nightmare. Only government would assume they could pressure another company into doing something it doesn't want to do. Then 'cloudify' the software, as if that's any different than virtualizing it! And as if that's any different than not virtualization it. It's really just gibberish.

@scottalanmiller said in Azure & "CentOS based" Compute node: @fuznutz04 said in Azure & "CentOS based" Compute node: @scottalanmiller said in Azure & "CentOS based" Compute node: But in the past CentOS was there as a direct option. We used it and have customer still using it. I wonder if MS will offer a base image again in the future with their new "commitment to Linux" claim. Their commitment was never to CentOS. Ubuntu and Suse. Ahh, missed that detail.

@Dashrender said in Ease of the "Cloud", Without the "Cloud": It surprises me that the costs could be lower. I would expect the economy of scale and lack of local IT support (or MSP/ITSP) requirements I would be allow prices to be driven lower. Of course you didn't say it would be lower, just said "often for much less cost." Scale is what makes it viable at all. Elastic scalability is an insanely expensive feature to deliver. And neither solution requires a local MSP/ITSP, that's part of the comparison. These are "plug and play" level products. But in reality, using a service like Amazon where the scale is really good you run into a heavy technical barrier to use that HC does not have (normally.) So if anything, cloud makes you have more ITSP requirements compared to HC. Cloud has a lot of hidden costs that HC does not have.

Thanks.

@Dashrender said in Windows VM in the cloud: I do realize that, but if the system works on LInux, it will probably work anywhere. That's not solid logic. Lots of things run on Linux but not in a browser.

@Dashrender said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence: @travisdh1 said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence: @Dashrender said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence: @scottalanmiller said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence: @travisdh1 said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence: @Dashrender said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence: But as we are constantly drilled by @scottalanmiller, most SMBs don't need HA. They can often afford hours, or even days of downtime. I generally agree with you. Our local 911 center was down for something like 36 hours a couple weeks back, made my head spin that. It's just the edge case to support @scottalanmiller's rule. They probably could have benefited from some better planning. I'm guessing they had a plan, they just forwarded their phones to another 911 call center to handle the situation while they were down. The county sheriff announced on the radio (yeah, I still listen to it when it's time for news), no 911 service, didn't even get the calls forwarded to a different 911 center. I mean, Wooster, OH and Wayne County are small, but you don't have 2 911 centers in the county at least? I would've thought the city and county would have one each, at least service doesn't get completely interrupted if one happens to go down, sheesh. Actually, that doesn't surprise me at all that the only have one. What is surprising is that they didn't have agreements with the next county over to take over their calls in case of an outage. Call the phone company and just hard forward all calls to the next county... wow.. just wow. Right, that is the logical way to go. Stark should have been able to handle those calls easily.

@Minion-Queen said in Office 365 "Oops" Stories: @BRRABill said in Office 365 "Oops" Stories: @Minion-Queen said Hence we when we do this one we actually migrate the data to 365 and 2 you don't delete the server for months until you are sure everything is where is should be and working correctly. Shoot I have a room of servers here from upgrades ... just in case. I'd have backups of backups before trying something like that. Just ... because comptuers YES!!! Yeah no such luck there. No backups at all. Except for I think one user who had put crashplan or something on their machine cause they were paranoid (I think there might have been good reason). I'm not sure "paranoid" would apply to those users.

@wirestyle22 I agree... and I like that better than the usual "you look like Anthony Michael Hall."

@gjacobse said in KeepassX & Cloud Storage: @johnhooks said in KeepassX & Cloud Storage: I keep my KeepassX database in DropBox, but my actual key file is not there. I've not used a Keyfile,.. only a 'decently long complex' password. I do both just because I'm paranoid. My password is only 15 characters, but with the key file I think it helps. That way even if someone gets my database they can hammer the database with passwords all they want but it won't matter.

@iroal said in Cloud Backup: @scottalanmiller said in Cloud Backup: S3 is for "nearline" storage. Things that you are going to access quickly. Glacier is archival storage, things that you can wait a bit to retrieve and will not retrieve often. Glacier is much cheaper to store, but much more expensive to retrieve. So if you are very unlikely to need to retrieve it and don't need it quickly, Glacier is better. Thanks, I think Glacier It's best option in my case. Can I make a Mirror Copy in Glaicer ? I'm not sure. Grab something like CloudBerry and you will get a good feel for options.

@FATeknollogee said in ColocationAmerica: @scottalanmiller How much rack space is being consumed, 1/2 cab, full cab? Well, we HAVE a full cab. Over half is used on initial equipment delivery. We have plans for at least one large NAS to be added soon and possible one large Sparc server that we are interested in adding. There will be some empty space, but not a lot.

ServerBear from KimSufi.... http://serverbear.com/benchmark/2016/03/20/6pfi28tqnMEb3OZA That's running on the Hypervisor OS, not in a VM.

@scottalanmiller said: What does Drush do? What requirements does it have that keep it from getting installed? Drush is a CLI tool for Drupal. You can pretty much manage your whole site with it. But you need root access (or sudo). If you update Drupal manually on shared hosting you pretty much have to back up the whole site, redownload the new Drupal version, reupload your sites folder (where all your info is), change the DB settings file, and chmod it. With drush you type drush up drupal and you're done. Or if you want to update everything (modules and themes also) type drush up It's more of a pain with shared hosting to do all of that also.

@nadnerB No help on that setting. I'm already set to "No limit"