Language:
switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: First ... 42 43 44 45 [46] 47 48 49 50 ... Last
[#] Mon Aug 31 2009 15:54:18 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Xen cannot do true virtualization on CPU's without hardware VT, only "paravirtualization" (which requires special builds of your operating systems). Since you are buying a brand new CPU this is not an issue for you.

Xen virtualization runs quite nicely if you have VT because the hardware is (finally) designed for it. You could also run VMware ESXi, which is their "bare metal hypervisor" but that does make the server headless; you'll need to *always* connect to the console with their client (which is Windows only; dunno if that's an issue for you).

[#] Mon Aug 31 2009 17:06:14 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Last time I installed vmware esxi (or some variant of esx, years ago) it didn't require an OS because it came with its own: linux. So who's kidding who here.

[#] Mon Aug 31 2009 17:07:01 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

So I looked up vmware and as of v6 it supports the VT intel stuff, so given it's feature set (the snapshots and all that other junk) what does xen buy me.
I'll see if I can find a comparison.

[#] Mon Aug 31 2009 17:13:14 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I've run them all ... Xen feels a little more lightweight and less cumbersome to me than VMware's products (and I do like VMware's products).

There's a difference between ESX and ESXi. ESXi is much, much smaller than ESX. In fact, you can buy servers with ESXi built in to the motherboard's flash memory now. The whole thing has a 32 MB footprint.

By the way ... beware the snapshot feature of VMware Server (the free one).
It only supports ONE snapshot. If you're really tired and don't pay enough attention to the warning (like me last Thursday night) you can perhaps overwrite a good snapshot with a not-so-good snapshot.

[#] Mon Aug 31 2009 20:25:50 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I found snapshots aren't good for what Iuse VM's for and they take tons of space, although now I have tons of space, so I guess that's not so much of an issue.
I'll play around and see what works.

[#] Mon Aug 31 2009 22:59:03 EDT from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Aug 29 2009 9:09am from Ford II @uncnsrd
cool thanks.
I'm debatinglinux or xp64 for my new machine.
I'd prefer linux, but sometimes I justfind the interface so annoying,

I'm not sure I want to live in that world all the time.



Go Vista 64 for the host, and put at least 6 gigs in it. The only thing to watch out for is that if your workplace uses Cisco's VPN client, and they haven't upgraded to the, I think it's called AnyConnect, it still doesn't support Vista 64 for the host. And neither does RSA SecurID.

Ford face it, you have never been a Linux true believer. You'll probably be happier with Windows, things just work. Most of the time. Honestly they properly implement more of the features they set out to implement, and they have QA as good as or better than Linux's, the only place they fall down is that you don't have the source so you can't debug it yourself if it comees to that.

[#] Mon Aug 31 2009 23:03:02 EDT from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

By the way ... beware the snapshot feature of VMware Server (the free

one). It only supports ONE snapshot. If you're really tired and don't

pay enough attention to the warning (like me last Thursday night) you

can perhaps overwrite a good snapshot with a not-so-good snapshot.


Just one of the growing list of reasons not to use VMware Server.

It's not a proper hypervisor, and neither is it a proper desktop virtualization solution: so it's neither here nor there.

Its Windows drivers aren't properly signed.


It *only* runs headless.

[#] Tue Sep 01 2009 09:22:34 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

VMware Server is still the only reasonable option if your server hardware is a couple of years old and doesn't have VT. For projects that don't involve someone spending a lot of money on new hardware, I unfortunately find myself in this position more often than I'd like to, but VMware Server does get the job done.

For new hardware, though ... VMware's high-end products are incomparable if you can afford them, and Xen has a nice reliable "close to the metal" feel to it, even if it doesn't have all of the enterprise features. For my own use I'd probably go with Xen if I had new hardware and no software budget.

Parallels is decent if you've got a Mac. KVM and Hyper-V are half-baked.

[#] Tue Sep 01 2009 10:41:28 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

implement, and they have QA as good as or better than Linux's, the only

place they fall down is that you don't have the source so you can't
debug it yourself if it comees to that.

Which I never do anyway.
Vista I'll stay away from, but as a test I installed xp64 and it seems nice and tidy.
The thing about windows is that I expect linux runs vm's more efficiently than windows does. I've seen time and time again, with programs I write and things like firefox that run on both platforms, the linux one makes more efficient use of the machine. It's not neccesarily better, but the OS overhead is smaller in linux.
I'm still torn. Machine's got 8 gigs I can do ANYTHING MUAH HA HA HAaaaaaaaa.

[#] Tue Sep 01 2009 10:43:57 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

well, I've got vmware 6something for both linux and xp (although only 32 bit versions) so I'll try them both. I've been reading reviews, they're all a bit slanted and none has really impressed me.
ls make a better impression than anything else.
I'm not a linux true believe when it comes to the desktop, but I couldn't live without a linux machine as a server. I can't imagine trying to run all the crap I do at home with only windows available.

[#] Tue Sep 01 2009 11:21:52 EDT from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

For new hardware, though ... VMware's high-end products are
incomparable if you can afford them, and Xen has a nice reliable "close

to the metal" feel to it, even if it doesn't have all of the enterprise

features. For my own use I'd probably go with Xen if I had new
hardware and no software budget.

Enterprise schmenterprise. We use Xen, here, for all our server farms except Oracle (Oracle refuses to support virtualization of any kind, and it doesn't make sense to consolidate Oracle servers anyway.)

[#] Tue Sep 01 2009 11:25:19 EDT from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Vista I'll stay away from, but as a test I installed xp64 and it
seems nice and tidy.

I guess, but my impression of XP64 is that it's kind of an orphan. Yes, it works. But it's not a feature-complete port of Windows, and I'd expect any third party software that needs to install something in kernel mode to eventually standardize on Vista 64-bit as a baseline, because that's where MS finally finished the job and that's where the end-user adoption is at.

[#] Tue Sep 01 2009 11:27:38 EDT from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Sep 1 2009 10:43am from Ford II @uncnsrd
well, I've got vmware 6something for both linux and xp (although only


If you don't want to pay, try VirtualBox.

[#] Tue Sep 01 2009 14:53:42 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Enterprise schmenterprise. We use Xen, here, for all our server farms

except Oracle (Oracle refuses to support virtualization of any kind,
and it doesn't make sense to consolidate Oracle servers anyway.)

Some schmenterprises demand the ability to move a VM from one physical host to another without shutting it down. VMware does that very well (and the first time you see it run, it's a jaw-dropping experience). Xen can't do it.

I'm just sayin'. Personally I don't think it's a big deal to shut a VM down for a few minutes while you move it around, but I regularly deal with people who get their panties in a bunch over downtime; every minute of downtime supposedly costs a few trillion dollars of lost revenue. These people will laugh in your face if you suggest anything other than VMware.

In Ford's situation, I would say that Xen probably fits the bill. With enough memory and disk space available, it might even make sense to use dom0 *only* as a container.

[#] Tue Sep 01 2009 16:13:40 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Yes, it works. But it's not a feature-complete port of Windows, and I'd

expect any third party software that needs to install something in
kernel mode to eventually standardize on Vista 64-bit as a baseline,
because that's where MS finally finished the job and that's where the

end-user adoption is at.

True. But consider, I'm still running w2k on my main windows machine. :-)
All it really HAS to do, is run vmware well, anything else it does well is a bonus.
It can run 32 bit apps nativly, that's good enough for me as long as it can talk to my ide drives and my camera and whatnot.
In my 5 minutes of playing with it, I noticed that it comes with ie32 bit and ie64 bit. Hmmm... So I imagine just about everything else is probably 32 bit
. But you know what? Even if it is effectivly 32 bit xp that can access all 8 gig, then that's what I need.

[#] Tue Sep 01 2009 16:20:59 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

If you don't want to pay, try VirtualBox.

I tried both vmware6 and virtualbox on the same machine a few months ago.
If I had nothing else, virtualbox would be amazing.
Having played with vmware already for years, it's not all that impressive. It's like comparing desqview and whatever microsoft's catch-up product was, can't remember the name of it at the moment.
They both do the tasq, but desqview was there first and much much better.

[#] Wed Sep 02 2009 05:25:54 EDT from dothebart @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

http://www.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2009-09-02-004-35-NW-KN-RL

neato. adding the windows kernel API to the linux kernel.

From there found out about Loongson:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loongson

its a mips based architecture created from scratch in mainland china.

 



[#] Wed Sep 02 2009 08:23:50 EDT from skpacman @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Holy crap.. a processor specifically built for linux. That kicks so much ass.

With reliability like that, who needs "power"?

With the right setup, 1.2GHz is more than enough to get the job done.



[#] Wed Sep 02 2009 14:00:04 EDT from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Some schmenterprises demand the ability to move a VM from one physical

host to another without shutting it down. VMware does that very well

(and the first time you see it run, it's a jaw-dropping experience).

Xen can't do it.

Umm, http://www.linux.com/archive/feature/55773

[#] Wed Sep 02 2009 14:39:06 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

That's the one missing feature I'd want to see (although the page you cited comes up blank, I looked it up elsewhere). Have you used it? If so, how well does it work?

Go to page: First ... 42 43 44 45 [46] 47 48 49 50 ... Last