On Thursday, July 7, 2016, Dave Page <
dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday, July 7, 2016, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 8:06 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On 07/06/2016 12:02 PM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 07/06/2016 07:55 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> On 07/06/2016 10:54 AM, Rader, David wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I am concerned that the "bare metal" description is misleading to
>> >>>> users,
>> >>>> since on both the Linux and Windows installers an OS is still
>> >>>> required.
>> >>>> Suggesting that the installer can setup a full stack including OS
>> >>>> will
>> >>>> be confusing.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Bare metal is an industry standard term for, "not virtualized".
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> it is but it is usually used in the context of operating systems - so I
>> >> kinda agree with david here that personally I would expect something
>> >> that is for "bare metal" is something that can directly be installed on
>> >> physical hardware (as in an OS).
>> >
>> >
>> > I am good either way, I was just expressing my experience.
>>
>> That has been my experience too, both in the office and in dealing
>> with large and small customers.
>>
>> I really don't care if it says "non-virtualised" instead though.
>>
>
> I know I'm coming late to this discussion, but I have a different comment on
> that. Which is, why is it there in the first plcae.
>
> In what way are the installers more designed for non-virtualized than
> DEB/RPM are? For virualized? For cloud, private, public, or hybrid?
They're more not "more designed" for any environment than RPM/DEBs.
These particular installers are much more flexible than some other
packages in that you can configure various options at installation
time that you cannot do in some other installers, or with RPM/DEBs. In
this case, some of that flexibility can be utilised in virtualised
environments if needed.
That may be of use for some users, or not for others.
Agreed. But I think the inclusion of wordings like cloud and hybrid cloud and things like that is feels strongly like marketing fluff, because the other ones are equally good for that (just in different ways). In fact, most people who actually dpeloy on clouds wouldn't use that, they'd use something like ansible or puppet anyway. Which works equally well with either of these solutions.
So I suggest - drop it.
//Magnus
--
Magnus Hagander
Me:
http://www.hagander.net/ Work:
http://www.redpill-linpro.com/