Why Virtualization?

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Aug 27, 2007.

  1. Frankly, I've been wondering why there's been so much fuss over this
    virtualization issue. My clients have Linux servers quite happily
    fulfilling multiple roles at once, without having to run multiple instances
    of the operating system.

    Now this item <http://blogs.zdnet.com/threatchaos/?p=469> seems to explain
    it: it's specifically virtualization of Windows that is the hot topic.
    Windows servers don't generally handle multiple roles very well, so people
    trying to use them as servers end up running multiple machines.
    Virtualization is a way of addressing this limitation of Windows.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Aug 27, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    none Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > Frankly, I've been wondering why there's been so much fuss over this
    > virtualization issue. My clients have Linux servers quite happily
    > fulfilling multiple roles at once, without having to run multiple instances
    > of the operating system.
    >
    > Now this item <http://blogs.zdnet.com/threatchaos/?p=469> seems to explain
    > it: it's specifically virtualization of Windows that is the hot topic.
    > Windows servers don't generally handle multiple roles very well, so people
    > trying to use them as servers end up running multiple machines.
    > Virtualization is a way of addressing this limitation of Windows.


    Clearly shows you have no real understanding of the concepts behind
    virtualisation - if it's just for Windows why are there multiple open
    source virtualisation platforms available exlcusively for virtualising
    linux?

    Most of the large scale VMWare (or similar) installations in NZ are
    primarily virtualising Linux servers to better utilize x86 hardware,
    increase availability etc.

    At least get a basic handle on the facts before climbing on your soapbox.
    none, Aug 27, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    whoisthis Guest

    In article <46d24a08$>, none <>
    wrote:

    > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > > Frankly, I've been wondering why there's been so much fuss over this
    > > virtualization issue. My clients have Linux servers quite happily
    > > fulfilling multiple roles at once, without having to run multiple instances
    > > of the operating system.
    > >
    > > Now this item <http://blogs.zdnet.com/threatchaos/?p=469> seems to explain
    > > it: it's specifically virtualization of Windows that is the hot topic.
    > > Windows servers don't generally handle multiple roles very well, so people
    > > trying to use them as servers end up running multiple machines.
    > > Virtualization is a way of addressing this limitation of Windows.

    >
    > Clearly shows you have no real understanding of the concepts behind
    > virtualisation - if it's just for Windows why are there multiple open
    > source virtualisation platforms available exlcusively for virtualising
    > linux?
    >
    > Most of the large scale VMWare (or similar) installations in NZ are
    > primarily virtualising Linux servers to better utilize x86 hardware,
    > increase availability etc.
    >
    > At least get a basic handle on the facts before climbing on your soapbox.


    yep, and when things go pear shaped its a damn good way of getting
    services up and running again with minimal downtime.
    whoisthis, Aug 27, 2007
    #3
  4. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    none Guest

    whoisthis wrote:
    > yep, and when things go pear shaped its a damn good way of getting
    > services up and running again with minimal downtime.


    If deployed properly, 99% of the time it can bring itself backup
    automagically.

    We're in the design phase at the moment and plan to virtualise most of
    our datacentre by mid next year.

    Our datacentre of 70+ servers, only ~5 of which are Windows.
    none, Aug 27, 2007
    #4
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Shane Guest

    none wrote:

    > whoisthis wrote:
    >> yep, and when things go pear shaped its a damn good way of getting
    >> services up and running again with minimal downtime.

    >
    > If deployed properly, 99% of the time it can bring itself backup
    > automagically.
    >
    > We're in the design phase at the moment and plan to virtualise most of
    > our datacentre by mid next year.
    >
    > Our datacentre of 70+ servers, only ~5 of which are Windows.


    This looks worthy of further investigation
    http://www.theregister.com/2007/08/27/fastscale_vmware_virtual_manager/
    --
    Q: What's big, grey, and proves the uncountability of the reals?
    A: Cantor's diagonal elephant.
    Shane, Aug 27, 2007
    #5
  6. In message <46d24a08$>, none wrote:

    > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >> Frankly, I've been wondering why there's been so much fuss over this
    >> virtualization issue. My clients have Linux servers quite happily
    >> fulfilling multiple roles at once, without having to run multiple
    >> instances of the operating system.
    >>
    >> Now this item <http://blogs.zdnet.com/threatchaos/?p=469> seems to
    >> explain it: it's specifically virtualization of Windows that is the hot
    >> topic. Windows servers don't generally handle multiple roles very well,
    >> so people trying to use them as servers end up running multiple machines.
    >> Virtualization is a way of addressing this limitation of Windows.

    >
    > Clearly shows you have no real understanding of the concepts behind
    > virtualisation - if it's just for Windows why are there multiple open
    > source virtualisation platforms available exlcusively for virtualising
    > linux?
    >
    > Most of the large scale VMWare (or similar) installations in NZ are
    > primarily virtualising Linux servers to better utilize x86 hardware,
    > increase availability etc.
    >
    > At least get a basic handle on the facts before climbing on your soapbox.


    But VMWare isn't open-source.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Aug 27, 2007
    #6
  7. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Alan Guest

    Check out Xen - it is open source (I believe).

    --

    Alan.

    The views expressed are my own, and not those of my employer or anyone
    else associated with me.

    My current valid email address is:



    This is valid as is. It is not munged, or altered at all.

    It will be valid for AT LEAST one month from the date of this post.

    If you are trying to contact me after that time,
    it MAY still be valid, but may also have been
    deactivated due to spam. If so, and you want
    to contact me by email, try searching for a
    more recent post by me to find my current
    email address.

    The following is a (probably!) totally unique
    and meaningless string of characters that you
    can use to find posts by me in a search engine:

    ewygchvboocno43vb674b6nq46tvb




    "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <_zealand> wrote in
    message news:fau351$jbd$...
    > In message <46d24a08$>, none wrote:
    >
    >> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >>> Frankly, I've been wondering why there's been so much fuss over
    >>> this
    >>> virtualization issue. My clients have Linux servers quite happily
    >>> fulfilling multiple roles at once, without having to run multiple
    >>> instances of the operating system.
    >>>
    >>> Now this item <http://blogs.zdnet.com/threatchaos/?p=469> seems to
    >>> explain it: it's specifically virtualization of Windows that is
    >>> the hot
    >>> topic. Windows servers don't generally handle multiple roles very
    >>> well,
    >>> so people trying to use them as servers end up running multiple
    >>> machines.
    >>> Virtualization is a way of addressing this limitation of Windows.

    >>
    >> Clearly shows you have no real understanding of the concepts behind
    >> virtualisation - if it's just for Windows why are there multiple
    >> open
    >> source virtualisation platforms available exlcusively for
    >> virtualising
    >> linux?
    >>
    >> Most of the large scale VMWare (or similar) installations in NZ are
    >> primarily virtualising Linux servers to better utilize x86
    >> hardware,
    >> increase availability etc.
    >>
    >> At least get a basic handle on the facts before climbing on your
    >> soapbox.

    >
    > But VMWare isn't open-source.
    Alan, Aug 27, 2007
    #7
  8. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    lolinternet Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > But VMWare isn't open-source.


    Errm... so?
    lolinternet, Aug 27, 2007
    #8
  9. In message <46d295ba$>, lolinternet wrote:

    > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >
    >> But VMWare isn't open-source.

    >
    > Errm... so?


    So it's hardly a good example of the point the OP was trying to make, is it?
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Aug 27, 2007
    #9
  10. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    lolinternet Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > In message <46d295ba$>, lolinternet wrote:
    >
    >> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >>
    >>> But VMWare isn't open-source.

    >> Errm... so?

    >
    > So it's hardly a good example of the point the OP was trying to make, is it?


    Clearly the fact it's two separate paragraphs confuses you.

    If virtualisation is only to solve windows problems, then why do XEN,
    UML and the like exist?

    The real drivers for virtualisation barely even touch on issues with
    Windows... the fact you've found a blog article to the contrary isn't
    really thread worthy.
    lolinternet, Aug 27, 2007
    #10
  11. In message <46d29e27$>, lolinternet wrote:

    > If virtualisation is only to solve windows problems, then why do XEN,
    > UML and the like exist?


    Those don't seem to be where the main market activity is. The main activity
    nowadays is in the hardware-based virtualization made possible by newer
    Intel and AMD processors. These can virtualize _any_ OS, not just Linux.

    This was reinforced by the fact that the only example the first respondent
    could mention by name was VMWare.

    > The real drivers for virtualisation barely even touch on issues with
    > Windows...


    And yet it seems like they do.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Aug 27, 2007
    #11
  12. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    none Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > This was reinforced by the fact that the only example the first respondent
    > could mention by name was VMWare.


    The only one I bothered to name was VMWare, as that's what I'm currently
    working with.

    Been there, done XEN, and have a UML setup running in a lab environment
    - just don't particularly care for either of them.
    none, Aug 27, 2007
    #12
  13. In message <46d33302$>, none wrote:

    > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >
    >> This was reinforced by the fact that the only example the first
    >> respondent could mention by name was VMWare.

    >
    > The only one I bothered to name was VMWare, as that's what I'm currently
    > working with.
    >
    > Been there, done XEN, and have a UML setup running in a lab environment
    > - just don't particularly care for either of them.


    Which is reinforcing the very point you tried to deny.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Aug 28, 2007
    #13
  14. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    none Guest

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > Which is reinforcing the very point you tried to deny.


    Sorry I can't quite twist my thoughts as well as you can.

    I'm using VMWare, a product I consider superior, to virtualise my
    predominantly Linux datacentre. This is to decrease the number of x86
    servers, reduce power consumption, improve utilisation of my x86 server
    resources, increase availability, and provide a simpler DR mechanism. It
    has no bearing on the fact I have 5 or so Windows servers.

    You're saying that by me doing that, I'm "reinforcing" that the main
    reason for virtualisation is that Windows sucks?

    If you could possibly clarify how you can draw a ridiculous conclusion
    like that, based on a product choice that'd be just super.

    o_0
    none, Aug 28, 2007
    #14
  15. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    whoisthis Guest

    In article <favtnn$rl7$>,
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro <_zealand> wrote:

    > In message <46d33302$>, none wrote:
    >
    > > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > >
    > >> This was reinforced by the fact that the only example the first
    > >> respondent could mention by name was VMWare.

    > >
    > > The only one I bothered to name was VMWare, as that's what I'm currently
    > > working with.
    > >
    > > Been there, done XEN, and have a UML setup running in a lab environment
    > > - just don't particularly care for either of them.

    >
    > Which is reinforcing the very point you tried to deny.


    which is what?
    I am running Parallels Desktop which is available for Mac OSX (I run XP
    and Ubuntu) and they do Parallels Workstation for Windows and Linux.
    VMWare is also available for the Mac too.

    You can also look a qemu, Xen,Virtualbox,OpenVZ, and I am sure others I
    have missed.
    whoisthis, Aug 28, 2007
    #15
  16. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Alan Guest

    Hi None,

    Out of interest, how did you find Xen? What was good or not so good
    about it?

    I was about to try it, once I find a machine around here that supports
    HW virtualisation, but it does seem more 'academic' than commercial
    when compared to VMWare / MS Virtual Server for example.

    Thanks,
    --

    Alan.

    The views expressed are my own, and not those of my employer or anyone
    else associated with me.

    My current valid email address is:



    This is valid as is. It is not munged, or altered at all.

    It will be valid for AT LEAST one month from the date of this post.

    If you are trying to contact me after that time,
    it MAY still be valid, but may also have been
    deactivated due to spam. If so, and you want
    to contact me by email, try searching for a
    more recent post by me to find my current
    email address.

    The following is a (probably!) totally unique
    and meaningless string of characters that you
    can use to find posts by me in a search engine:

    ewygchvboocno43vb674b6nq46tvb




    "none" <> wrote in message
    news:46d33302$...
    > Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    >> This was reinforced by the fact that the only example the first
    >> respondent
    >> could mention by name was VMWare.

    >
    > The only one I bothered to name was VMWare, as that's what I'm
    > currently working with.
    >
    > Been there, done XEN, and have a UML setup running in a lab
    > environment - just don't particularly care for either of them.
    Alan, Aug 28, 2007
    #16
  17. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Enkidu Guest

    Alan wrote:
    > Hi None,
    >
    > Out of interest, how did you find Xen? What was good or not so good
    > about it?
    >
    > I was about to try it, once I find a machine around here that supports
    > HW virtualisation, but it does seem more 'academic' than commercial
    > when compared to VMWare / MS Virtual Server for example.
    >

    I use it a fair bit. Don't use HW virtualization though RHEL5 and
    RHEL4.5 only.

    Cheers,

    Cliff

    --

    Have you ever noticed that if something is advertised as 'amusing' or
    'hilarious', it usually isn't?
    Enkidu, Aug 28, 2007
    #17
  18. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    AD. Guest

    On Aug 28, 9:37 pm, "Alan" <> wrote:
    > I was about to try it, once I find a machine around here that supports
    > HW virtualisation, but it does seem more 'academic' than commercial
    > when compared to VMWare / MS Virtual Server for example.


    The open source Xen project has an academic background (from
    Cambridge), but Xen Source (the company) provides commercial products
    and support services. The Xen Source products (although I haven't used
    them) seem far less DIY than the open source version of Xen and have
    slightly different feature sets (eg optimised drivers for Windows
    guests, and management GUIs etc)

    If you just want to use Linux guests, for the most part you don't need
    HW virtualisation support. Any old 686 equivalent machine can run
    paravirtualised guests. The HW support is only needed for running
    unmodified non paravirtualisation aware guests (eg Windows).

    Trying out Xen (3.0.3) on Debian Etch is pretty much just a case of
    installing the relevant packages via apt-get/aptitude. Hint: install
    the xen-tools package to make setting up and managing different guests
    easier.

    --
    Cheers
    Anton
    AD., Aug 29, 2007
    #18
  19. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Steve Guest

    On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 21:37:36 +1200, Alan wrote:

    > Hi None,
    >
    > Out of interest, how did you find Xen? What was good or not so good
    > about it?
    >
    > I was about to try it, once I find a machine around here that supports
    > HW virtualisation, but it does seem more 'academic' than commercial
    > when compared to VMWare / MS Virtual Server for example.
    >
    > Thanks,


    For me, it's still in the 'not ready yet' pile.
    Steve, Aug 29, 2007
    #19
  20. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Alan Guest

    Hi Anton,

    I would need to cover off virtualisation of Windows and Linux with one
    solution (for sanity I don't really want multiple solutions).

    It would be interesting to try:

    H/W -> Xen -> Linux -> WMWare -> Windows

    However, my brain would get addled trying to remember where I was at!

    --

    Alan.

    The views expressed are my own, and not those of my employer or anyone
    else associated with me.

    My current valid email address is:



    This is valid as is. It is not munged, or altered at all.

    It will be valid for AT LEAST one month from the date of this post.

    If you are trying to contact me after that time,
    it MAY still be valid, but may also have been
    deactivated due to spam. If so, and you want
    to contact me by email, try searching for a
    more recent post by me to find my current
    email address.

    The following is a (probably!) totally unique
    and meaningless string of characters that you
    can use to find posts by me in a search engine:

    ewygchvboocno43vb674b6nq46tvb




    "AD." <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Aug 28, 9:37 pm, "Alan" <> wrote:
    >> I was about to try it, once I find a machine around here that
    >> supports
    >> HW virtualisation, but it does seem more 'academic' than commercial
    >> when compared to VMWare / MS Virtual Server for example.

    >
    > The open source Xen project has an academic background (from
    > Cambridge), but Xen Source (the company) provides commercial
    > products
    > and support services. The Xen Source products (although I haven't
    > used
    > them) seem far less DIY than the open source version of Xen and have
    > slightly different feature sets (eg optimised drivers for Windows
    > guests, and management GUIs etc)
    >
    > If you just want to use Linux guests, for the most part you don't
    > need
    > HW virtualisation support. Any old 686 equivalent machine can run
    > paravirtualised guests. The HW support is only needed for running
    > unmodified non paravirtualisation aware guests (eg Windows).
    >
    > Trying out Xen (3.0.3) on Debian Etch is pretty much just a case of
    > installing the relevant packages via apt-get/aptitude. Hint: install
    > the xen-tools package to make setting up and managing different
    > guests
    > easier.
    >
    > --
    > Cheers
    > Anton
    >
    Alan, Aug 30, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Knowing About

    Opsware Offers Virtualization View

    Knowing About, Sep 18, 2006, in forum: VOIP
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    440
    Knowing About
    Sep 18, 2006
  2. 7
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    511
    arachnid
    Nov 3, 2006
  3. Mark Gillespie

    x64 and Vanderpool virtualization.

    Mark Gillespie, Jul 18, 2006, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    509
  4. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Virtualization

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 12, 2006, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    342
    thingy
    Oct 12, 2006
  5. Lodi

    Virtualization question - Kubuntu

    Lodi, Sep 28, 2007, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    625
    -=rjh=-
    Oct 4, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page