[NTLUG:Discuss] VM Ware Questions

[Bryan J. Smith]

From:  Robert Pearson 
> (01) Install a Linux of choice (compatible with VMware) on the hardware
> (02) Install VMware

Yes, install the "host" OS.
Think of VMWare as "just another app" for the host platform.

> (03) Install Windows

Boot VMWare and install a "guest" OS.

> (04) Install Solaris?

Another "guest" OS, so do the same as 03.

> (05) Boot the machine

Nope.  No "host" reboot necessary (except for maybe any kernel modification that the initial install of VMWare requires).

You "boot" the VMWare session whenever you want to run the "guest" OS.

> (06) Select session(s)? I could have everything up at once?

Yes.  Although I haven't checked the licensing on some of the entry products.
They may only allow 1 simultaneous "guest" OS in addition to the "host."

> (07) Do I hotkey between sessions?

Yes.  Although a "guest" can be a "Window" in the "host."

> (08) Are just move the mouse to the desired session window?

Yes, as 08m.

> (09) Some way to end session and start session - shutdown and boot?

Yes, you can shutdown the virtual machine with the "guest" OS.
That's one of "powers" of virtualization.

> (10) Is memory the limiting resource?

Memory, processing, I/O, same as always.

> (11) Can sessions talk to each other like separate platforms can with
> IP or Samba?

Yes.  Different IPs can be assigned to the virtualized hardware.
The host and multiple guests can treat each other as seperate NICs.

> (12) If file systems are compatible can the same file be open for
> writing in more than one session? Like SUSE and Solaris at the same time?
> Or a text file in Windows, SUSE and Solaris?

Yes and no.

First off, the "guest" instances are stored as files on the "host" filesystem.
So the host can mount them and read them _if_ the guest isn't booted.
This is a major power of virtualization, because if a "guest" OS "dorks up", I can replace it with an older copy I backed up.

Secondly, you _can_ "multiboot" multiple OSes in a _single_ "guest" OS, just like a real system.
VMWare is just virtualizing storage, so you could dual-boot inside of one - and either OS would see the same, virtualized storage.

Third, a guest can use "real' storage on the host.
But the host cannot have it mounted.
In that case, the "guest" is talking to "true hardware."

These concepts are hard to follow, I know.
You just have to play with it to know what I mean.

> Any VMware users worried since EMC bought VMware? 

Nope.
EMC is just competing with IBM and Microsoft.

IBM sells big iron with virtualization aka "partitioning" for a variety of OSes (Windows, Linuxm etc...).
Microsoft sells Virtual PC which let's a client/server platform, namely Windows (and Mac), do the same. 

EMC bought VMWare so it could compete with both IBM and Microsoft.
VMWare is a client/server platform, namely Linux or Windows, to also do the same.
Especially IBM who competes with EMC in both the storage and Windows services space.

FYI, I was in St. Louis in October working with EMC as a Linux Architect at a major client of theirs.
Windows guests atop of Linux/VMWare was 1 of my 4 duties.
Long story short, the client was sick of the TCO of "raw" Windows instances.
And Virtual PC doesn't solve that issue (i.e., the host is still Windows), and IBM "big iron" is far more costly.

So no, I think EMC is only going to take the product to new heights of adoption.


-- 
Bryan J. Smith (currently mobile)
b.j.smith at ieee.org