[NTLUG:Discuss] Virtualization recomendations (was Video card recommendations)

[Robert Pearson]

On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 8:05 AM, Bob Netherton <Bob.Netherton at sun.com> wrote:
>
>>  On another topic entirely, I signed up for a free OpenSolaris CD.  I
>> got a note from Sun saying it had shipped on May 15.
>
> Send me your mailing address privately and I'll make sure you get a
> copy.  I'll burn it myself :-)   I probably have a trunkload of them
> back at the office, if I ever get back there.
>
>>   I want to try VirtualBox out.
>
> VirtualBox is pretty cool.   I'm doing a presentation on it at the
> local OpenSolaris Users Group next Thursday.  Chris and I have talked
> about cooperation across the two groups and this may be one of those
> times where there isn't going to be any "Solaris is the greatest
> thing in the world" content :-)   So you all are welcome to come over
> and hear about it - or if you guys want we can do it for one of your
> upcoming meetings.
>
> Registration URL is at
> https://www.suneventreg.com//cgi-bin/register.pl?EventID=2321
>
> Pizza, soft drinks at 6:30 and program at 7.  Will be done by 8:30.
>
> I will be showing several Linux guest operating systems :-)
>

Is this what used to be the DFWOSUG (DFW OpenSolaris Users Group)?
I would like to attend the meetings.

>>  I have not got Xen to work worth a hoot.
>
> Xen is starting to get pretty stable, especially if you have relatively
> modern hardware (which I don't here at home - hence the system buildout
> project).  PV drivers for HVM guests are starting to show up which give
> the best of both worlds - hybrid HVM/PV.  I have come to the conclusion
> that Xen is best used for server type workloads (web servers, compute
> severs, application servers).  The expensive graphics rendering doesn't
> make it the best thing for interactive desktop applications - it is
> just too heavy for that.  I like VirtualBox for those type of
> applications.   But the cost of the code scanner makes VB a less than
> ideal choice for server workloads that spend a lot of time in the
> kernel (translate that to ring 0 in x86 parlance).
>
>> VMWare Server is OK, but the license makes me uncomfortable.  Ond
>> it is not open source.
>
> I have a couple of problems with VMware server beyond that.  The
> continual bloat of the product, adding all the web wrapper stuff
> is making this thing a pretty large application.  I teach a class
> and we used to use VMware server, but the poor performance of it
> lately has caused us to switch to something else - and that
> something is VirtualBox (thank goodness we acquired them).
>
> My bigger problem with VMware is that the product is targeted at the
> Windows market.   Yeah, I get it - Windows single use servers due to
> DLL conflicts is a problem, there are lots of servers running out
> there at low utilization.  Got it - but that same approach doesn't
> work well for our types of operating systems where we do run
> multiple applications at higher loads and certainly more kernel
> time.
>
> Even worse than that though is the credibility gap when VMware
> starts being positioned has a High Availability (HA) solution.
> Now is there anyone with firing neurons that isn't more afraid
> of Windows crashing than their hardware ?  No amount of virtualization
> magic is going to make that problem go away, and it is
> disingenuous to suggest that you don't need HA when you have
> VMware.
>
>>  I know something in this space will work out in
>> the long run.  KVM, maybe.
>
> Where are the commercial distributions with respect to KVM ?   Most
> were lining up for the Xen train, at least before Citrix acquired
> XenSource.  I know that we're still strongly committed to it.   I
> don't see that much commitment to KVM out of the commercial guys, but
> someone please tell me if I'm wrong.
>
>
> Oh - and on the graphics front, you got a pretty good card for $20.
> It's surprising what you can get for $20 today.   It's amazing how
> much you can heat your office for about $100 :-)
>
> Bob
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.ntlug.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>