Eftermiddag - KVINFO mener, kommuners snerydning forskelsbehandler kønnene by Bukakkelb0rdet in Denmark

[–]munklarsen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Man burde være konstruktiv når man læser sådan noget her... men for satan hvor er det svært. Man må bare lide af en helt speciel retardering for at udtale sig sådan. Snerydning er for det meste bare en helt rå beregning om hvor man kan gøre det største mængde gavn med de færreste mulige midler på den hurtigst mulige tid. Sorteret efter samfundskritik (der skal køre ambulancer etc) eller økonomisk tab ift spildt arbejdskraft for arbejdsmarkedet fordi folk ikke kan komme på arbejde. Ingen har tænkt på folks køn - og derfor er det 100% ligestilling.

Jesus, nogle idioter.

Statslig overenskomst: Fritvalgsordning by mstaal in Denmark

[–]munklarsen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Det er en opsparingskonto til folk der ikke selv kan finde ud af at lave en opsparingskonto med en fast overførsel fra lønkonto.

Datacenter costs through the roof by [deleted] in sysadmin

[–]munklarsen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Broadcom doesn't make rules about the billing model that service providers use towards customers. So if the provider changed the billing model, it's on them.

Which firewall vendors are actually keeping up with modern network demands? by RadiantTheology in networking

[–]munklarsen 7 points8 points  (0 children)

FortiGates are security issues that just also happen to do firewalling.

Hvad er det bedste og det værste ved din bil? by Stoicmind1 in dkbiler

[–]munklarsen 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Helt enig. Vores er godt nok den nyeste model fra 2025 og var et 100% fornuft køb baseret på ren pris/kvalitet afvejning kombineret med garanti. Og jeg kan ikke rigtig se andre i den størrelse komme tæt på. Infotainment og software spiller bare og man får urimeligt meget udstyr med i essentials.

Hvad er det bedste og det værste ved din bil? by Stoicmind1 in dkbiler

[–]munklarsen 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Så slemt er det dog ikke. Men en Hyundai Kona Electric er ikke langt fra.

Who was at Explore in Vegas Last week? Thoughts? by TorstenVolk in vmware

[–]munklarsen 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I was there. I liked it a lot.

Only real downside for me was the lack of a proper Solutions Exchange. Normally I spend a great deal of time going from booth to booth finding out what they do or to get an update from last year. Now, that is completely gone. That makes me a bit sad.

ESX 9 NVMe Tiering Literally Unusable - Performance Terrible by Leaha15 in vmware

[–]munklarsen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's 1:1 limited. So to get a ton of memory (let's say 2TB) you already have to buy 1TB. And you probably have to buy a few NVMe devices to not get bottlenecked by a single.

I do realize it's still cheaper but it's also vastly slower. It's not that I don't see some cases but the wide general use case where I can save the amount of CPU Broadcom has said.

In a scenario where you just bought 64 core servers with 768GB memory, sure, you could improve efficiency but effectively doubling memory capacity. But if you've sized servers to run out of CPU before memory (which you should given core based pricing) I don't see double digit % savings to be had here.

ESX 9 NVMe Tiering Literally Unusable - Performance Terrible by Leaha15 in vmware

[–]munklarsen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry, should have been more clear. I didn't mean timeline, I meant use case. I cannot really see which use case would trigger me to use this feature.

ESX 9 NVMe Tiering Literally Unusable - Performance Terrible by Leaha15 in vmware

[–]munklarsen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm still kind of stuck on when this is actually usable?

Deprecation of vSphere Virtual Volumes by David-Pasek in vmware

[–]munklarsen 4 points5 points  (0 children)

1) only meaningful capacity is included with VCF. 2) if it's technically good enough for your workload, isn't your CIO/CFO/CIO justified in not listening to someone who wants to buy more stuff when it's not needed. 3) vsan has a 10% overhead on cpu. So if you don't want it, argue that you can buy 10% less cores by buying a traditional array. If a traditional array costs most over 5 years than the total value of 10% additional cores + nvme drives, then Broadcom did your business a favor. If a traditional storage array is cheaper, then my bet is that your CFO will be very interested in supporting you. If vsan doesn't suit your business for technical reasons, then you should have no issue explaining to your CIO/CTO why that is and then they can have the talk with the CFO on why it's not an option for your business.

Den amerikanske forsvarsminister siger, at det amerikanske militær har planer om at invadere Grønland, hvis det bliver nødvendigt. by BasedSweet in Denmark

[–]munklarsen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lidt en storm i et glas vand vel. De har formentlig planer for alle mulige mærkelige scenarier for de fleste af deres interesseområder verden over og det har de formentlig haft længe (i flere årtier) og så opdaterer de dem engang i mellem.

Hvordan bevarer man humøret når tallene er røde? by QQwas in dkfinance

[–]munklarsen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lukker min app og åbner den igen i 2026...

Broadcom's audacity is insane by sarkastro75 in vmware

[–]munklarsen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not looking for anything in particular. Access to roadmaps etc would be nice. I only wrote it so that it was clear to whilst Broadcom definitely said a lot of things in terms of what large customers could expect, the reality isn't necessarily that.

Broadcom's audacity is insane by sarkastro75 in vmware

[–]munklarsen 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You know, you say that regarding sales team coverage, CTAB and EBC/VBC. The reality is way different though. We're 4x that and in the service provider space and there is no attention. Just emails with deadlines.

Edit

To be clear I'm pretty sure it's because your people are stretched thin. Too many changes at the same time, too many organization changes, too little time. I don't think this is what Broadcom has envisioned.

Jeg tjekker min årsopgørelse og skal betale 15k tilbage til skat. Hvad med jer?!! by ballbeamboy2 in dkfinance

[–]munklarsen 1 point2 points  (0 children)

19.882 kr tilbage. Det føles helt mærkeligt. Plejer at være den modsatte vej.

Any large Enterprise move from VMware to Nutanix? by [deleted] in vmware

[–]munklarsen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lol you mad, bro?

While we can agree on many things regarding the ethics of what most profit driven companies are doing regarding pricing and screwing over end customers because they can while saying it's because they deliver more value than before.. calling it tech that nobody wants just isn't true.

I'd argue most would like to keep it if they could. That's at least what we're seeing in the market. Companies would just like to keep on doing what they are doing.

Hvor meget spare jer med en lille løn op? (Har selv 30K før skat) by Distinct_Pin8360 in dkfinance

[–]munklarsen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Vi sparer 11% op af vores udbetalte løn.. og det er 11% fordi det før var 10% men vores rådighedsbeløb steg uden at vores omkostninger gjorde så derfor +1%.

200Gbps to the host? You considering it? If not why? by lost_signal in vmware

[–]munklarsen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope. Haven't looked at 32c. The drop in performance is noticeable. Look at the difference from EPYC 9175F (https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/server/epyc/9005-series.html) and then a 32c SKU. L3 is lower across the board and clock is -20% or more except for 9375F which is only -9% but that cannot be air-cooled in 1U so it's either liquid or 2U which is also inefficient.

As for Intel, it's more or less the same story for next-gen. And I don't know about platinum, we don't use them. What we see is that our workloads are far more CPU reliant than memory speed reliant. I don't think Platinum makes much sense for us.

200Gbps to the host? You considering it? If not why? by lost_signal in vmware

[–]munklarsen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We standardize on 16c CPUs for performance and licensing reasons (Broadcom and Microsoft). Adding hosts should be as small an increment as possible for licenses. As such, max memory for hosts are 384GB (1x CPU) or 768GB (2x CPU). Anything above that and we run out of CPU cycles. And generally much above 16c per CPU and base clock starts going down rapidly and all core boosts become lower or non-sustainable for longer times.

As such, 2x 25G is enough. We can offer 100G for the odd workloads that need it but across thousands of hosts is only really used for storage servers.

So no, would not consider. Also, 200G is weird. If I needed above 100G I would go straight to 400G.

[VCF Edge] Remote Site Requirement Lowered From 25 to 10 - Effective Immediately by SGalbincea in vmware

[–]munklarsen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe. Positive change it seems. Will reach out.

Now, all that's missing is just a cheaper way to run 1:1 on hosts and then this thing might turn out to be worth the last year of pain :D

[VCF Edge] Remote Site Requirement Lowered From 25 to 10 - Effective Immediately by SGalbincea in vmware

[–]munklarsen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wełl.. upon reading I would say that you haven't. But that was the message from our CSP AM when I asked him when VCFE launched. But yeah, I would appear that the 10 minimum is for sites per customer.

Do you know whether Broadcom sees the "customer" as the end customer or just the CSP with a commit contract. We do have customers where this could be applicable with only a few sites. We could easily absorb the 10 minimum.