<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Virtualization on Forward or Reverse</title>
    <link>https://blog.wannemacher.us/categories/virtualization/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Virtualization on Forward or Reverse</description>
    <generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2014 19:36:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    
	<atom:link href="https://blog.wannemacher.us/categories/virtualization/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    
    
    <item>
      <title>Foreman ESXi Installation Never Completes</title>
      <link>https://blog.wannemacher.us/posts/p540/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2014 19:36:10 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://blog.wannemacher.us/posts/p540/</guid>
      <description>In our environment we want to use Foreman to build our OCP hardware. It was working well except that the installation would repeatedly PXE boot to reinstall because Foreman would not know that the PXE portion was complete.
The standard notification code below was failing for some reason.
1 2  %post --interpreter=busybox --ignorefailure=true wget -O /dev/null &amp;lt;%= foreman_url %&amp;gt;   After running the unattended install in a Fusion VM so I could have console access I reviewed the install log and a misleading message from wget about the URL being bad.</description>
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <title>Problems with intuitive availability calculations</title>
      <link>https://blog.wannemacher.us/posts/p482/</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 00:36:54 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://blog.wannemacher.us/posts/p482/</guid>
      <description>I often see/hear comments from people whose common sense approach to availability design includes eliminating a single point of failure. This is a great goal when required, but care must be take that the &amp;ldquo;common sense&amp;rdquo; approach is actually achieving what is required. I have found that using a fault tree approach to evaluating design decisions can be insightful.
The last instance of this is a book, while otherwise great, gave the advice of separating a database from the application function onto separate servers because there was a single point of failure.</description>
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <title>Helpful Commands for vCenter Linked Mode Troubleshooting</title>
      <link>https://blog.wannemacher.us/posts/p423/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Apr 2011 21:13:00 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://blog.wannemacher.us/posts/p423/</guid>
      <description>Launch the command prompt via: Start | Programs | ADAM | ADAM Tools Command Prompt
 dsdiag.exe /s:localhost:389 repadmin.exe /viewlist * /homeserver:localhost:389 repadmin.exe /replsummary * /homeserver:localhost:389 repadmin.exe * /repsto /homeserver:localhost:389 repadmin.exe /showconn * /homeserver:localhost:389  </description>
    </item>
    
    <item>
      <title>Free virtualization book from Microsoft</title>
      <link>https://blog.wannemacher.us/posts/p393/</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Nov 2010 15:31:10 +0000</pubDate>
      
      <guid>https://blog.wannemacher.us/posts/p393/</guid>
      <description>Understanding Microsoft Virtualization Solutions (Second Edition)
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/microsoft_press/archive/2010/02/16/free-ebook-understanding-microsoft-virtualization-r2-solutions.aspx</description>
    </item>
    
  </channel>
</rss>