There is so much random stuff on the web these days. Some content is good for a laugh but then there is that content that leaves you scratching your head. Over at v_Critical, looks like their investigatory prowess has uncovered that something's afoot with Hyper-V.
According to the article, the Hyper-V dynamic memory demo at TechEd this year presented by Bryon Surace did a very BAD thing. It showed 20 VMs created on a single host with 14 powered on, but only one actually showing dynamic memory demand. Naturally it was time to conjur up conspiracy theories about why this was the case. Ultimately the writer landed on the conclusion that this was a "fake" demo.
The writer of the article goes off and installs Hyper-V in his lab, creates 12 VMs with Win7 installed, and dynamic memory enabled to prove only three things:
So then (and here is the funny part), the writer finishes the article with:
"Clearly the Dynamic Memory demo at MMS 2011 was misleading, but why? Could Hyper-V Dynamic Memory have accommodated that same VM density if operating systems were actually running?"
Based on the slides presented at TechEd, the content was about explaining dynamic memory in depth. The demo focused on showcasing dynamic memory "in action" in line with the content presented.
However, maybe the writer of the article can present Hyper-V dynamic memory at the next Microsoft event since he has so much experience showing how well it works and how well it scales with many VMs running.
So I guess thanks for demoing Hyper-V :-)