Slashdot Mirror

sorry, but either you're doing it wrong, or you didn't notice the part where i said it's not an out-of-box solution. it requires actual thought, planning, direction, testing, etc. i'll assume you were trying Oracle in a virtual environment in order to run multiple OS instances on one machine? in most of the successful implementations that i've heard of, this is not how it's done. you use the virtual environment for its scalability, it's HA features (think vmotion, etc), and so on. it's not so you can squeeze that 10% load fileserver in as a VM.....

take the following with a grain of salt: http://blogs.vmware.com/performance/2007/11/ten-reasons-why.html

i seriously have to wonder if your response is just a case of poor implementation, or if you're a default-answer-is-no person, or if you're on the "DBs suxor in VMs, d00d" bandwagon, like many are on the "i hate M$" bandwagon....(or maybe you work on Oracle VM?)

anyway, the success stories that i'm aware of all included DB architects, SAN architects, VMware gurus, linux and windows gurus, and a formal plan, with the correct hardware implementation (including fiber, new multi-cpu multicore servers, many hundreds of gigs of RAM, and so on... i guess better luck next time?

Not even close. http://vmware.com/products/thinapp/

Yes, VMware provides a technology for its datacenter level products called VMotion that does exactly that, moving VM's between physical virtualised servers in a cluster while preserving all active networking connections.

I don't know the specifics of how it works and manages that feat, but I have seen tech demos that show it in action. I watched one a while ago published by Dell showing a VMotion task in progress, I'm sure you can find it on the web somewhere with some digging around.

Regardless, it does work and has been available as part of its enterprise products for some time.

If you want to know more:
http://www.vmware.com/products/vi/vc/vmotion.html

To clear up the acronym soup a little:

HA = High Availability
Technology that aims to ensure (high) availability of virtual machines across a virtualised cluster through intelligent monitoring of VM's and cluster resources.
http://www.vmware.com/products/vi/vc/ha.html

DR = Distributed Resource Scheduler (I assume that's what parent meant)
Provides much more advanced and fine-grained control of the available resources in a virtualised cluster.
http://www.vmware.com/products/vi/vc/drs.html

BC = Consolidated Backup (guessing)
Backup technology for virtualised clusters, providing backup features specific to virtualisation scenarios that conventional backup products don't traditionally offer, although, BC can integrate with them to an extent.
http://www.vmware.com/products/vi/consolidated_backup.html

To clear up the acronym soup a little:

HA = High Availability
Technology that aims to ensure (high) availability of virtual machines across a virtualised cluster through intelligent monitoring of VM's and cluster resources.
http://www.vmware.com/products/vi/vc/ha.html

DR = Distributed Resource Scheduler (I assume that's what parent meant)
Provides much more advanced and fine-grained control of the available resources in a virtualised cluster.
http://www.vmware.com/products/vi/vc/drs.html

BC = Consolidated Backup (guessing)
Backup technology for virtualised clusters, providing backup features specific to virtualisation scenarios that conventional backup products don't traditionally offer, although, BC can integrate with them to an extent.
http://www.vmware.com/products/vi/consolidated_backup.html

To clear up the acronym soup a little:

HA = High Availability
Technology that aims to ensure (high) availability of virtual machines across a virtualised cluster through intelligent monitoring of VM's and cluster resources.
http://www.vmware.com/products/vi/vc/ha.html

DR = Distributed Resource Scheduler (I assume that's what parent meant)
Provides much more advanced and fine-grained control of the available resources in a virtualised cluster.
http://www.vmware.com/products/vi/vc/drs.html

BC = Consolidated Backup (guessing)
Backup technology for virtualised clusters, providing backup features specific to virtualisation scenarios that conventional backup products don't traditionally offer, although, BC can integrate with them to an extent.
http://www.vmware.com/products/vi/consolidated_backup.html

One of my main problems with VMWare is that a VM itself takes so much disk space that it takes a long time to work with (copy, archive etc) and I can't fit many on my laptop. Somewhat paradoxically, it must be possible to snapshot an application with its entire environment so you have a known working version.

If I'm understanding you correctly, the solution you are after is already offered by VMware:
http://vmware.com/products/thinapp/

Make sure to check the features tab for a more summarized and technical overview of what exactly ThinApp does and is capable of. Unfortunately, ThinApp is currently Windows only; I have no idea if they are intending to support Unix OS's in the future.

Is this the sort of functionality you are thinking about? Apologies if I've misintepreted your comment.

Well, you can run whatever runs on Linux on top of a mainframe.

Only if you recompile those apps to run on the special versions of Linux that run on mainframes. Let's see: I can recompile my app to run on some weird offshoot of Linux on expensive, proprietary hardware or I can take it and "P2V" it onto VMware running which ever flavor of mainstream Linux I prefer? Oh, and I can P2V my Windows apps onto that same VMware cluster? And all that for a fraction of the price? Sold.

Just to be clear I'm not saying that the mainframe has no place in the modern datacenter, I'm just saying that VMware is a better fit in many situations. (And it's certainly an order of magnitude cheaper.)

And if you're a Fortune 500 corporation, chances are your existing billing and accounting applications are *already* running on a mainframe. That is, after all, what the old girl is built for.

Not sure where the F500 argument came from, but since 486 out of those 500 already use VMware I think they're already sold. (All 100 of the F100, BTW.) http://www.vmware.com/customers/

In any case, my original point remains. Mainframes are expensive and proprietary whereas VMware is cheap and offers the flexibility to run whatever app on whatever OS you choose. This new VDC-OS stuff just builds on an already good thing. We'll be happy to renew our ELA when it comes up next year.

If you're going to do anything that uses both RAM and CPU (aka VMware hosts, which is what most big servers are used for these days) you'd better off with an Opteron.

You could not be more wrong. Xeons dominate the VMmark benchmarks. Go home, fanboi.

HyperTransport may indeed be better design than a shared high-speed bus, but that design advantage is negated by Intel's process and manufacturing excellence. Almost all benchmarks bear this out, SPEC, TPC, VMmark, whatever. Except perhaps at the extreme high end (>=8 sockets, which is less than 5% of the server market by revenue). I don't think Intel even offers an 8-socket Xeon platform.

http://www.vmware.com/pdf/hypervisor_performance.pdf
http://www.vmware.com/pdf/Multi-NIC_Performance.pdf

You can google the rest for yourself, I'm sure.

http://www.vmware.com/pdf/hypervisor_performance.pdf
http://www.vmware.com/pdf/Multi-NIC_Performance.pdf

You can google the rest for yourself, I'm sure.

If you are already running VMWare, then I would recommend downloading a pre-configured virtual appliance. They are ready-to-go VM W/X/LAMP installs that sometimes even offer a slimmed down version for minimal footprint; pick one that resembles the target production environment and you are ready to go.

Seriously, with the Olympics barely over, haven't you people learned anything yet? nbcolympics.com used Silverlight, too. Linux doesn't work. Unless you have XP or Vista running under VMware. Then, it will work. Just make sure you've got enough RAM on your system -- and if you're going to virtualize, run XP. If you're trying to run Vista that way, you probably ought to just be shot up front so as to put you out of your misery,... ;-)

Operating System: Only Windows XP (SP2 or SP3) and Windows Vista are supported at this time. Running Windows on a Mac? Photosynth runs under Boot Camp only. Parallels and other VM software cannot run the viewer.

A posting, with video, on the VMware Fusion blog begs to differ. You do need to be running VMware Fusion 2 latest beta though.

Cheers,
Ian

It's actually pretty complicated. VMware have a PDF which goes into quite a bit of detail on the subject: https://www.vmware.com/pdf/vmware_timekeeping.pdf

The basic gist is that VMs aren't running all the time; this is kind of the point of virtualisation w.r.t. server consolidation. Generally this is a good thing, because you can merge a dozen servers that average 5% CPU usage onto a single host. But since the guests are not running all the time, they can't possibly receive every interrupt as it happens. Therefore the hypervisor has to fake them in some manner, and that gets a bit tricky.

Here is an email I just got from VMware

Dear VMware Customers,

Please find the latest update about the product expiration issue. From this point on, weâ(TM)ll provide an update every two hours. Thanks.

Problem:

An issue has been discovered by many VMware customers and partners with ESX/ESXi 3.5 Update 2 where Virtual Machines fail to power on or VMotion successfully. This problem began to occur on August 12, 2008 for customers that had upgraded to ESX 3.5 Update 2. The problem is caused by a build timeout that was mistakenly left enabled for the release build.

Affected Products:

* VMware ESX 3.5 Update 2 & ESXi 3.5 Update 2
* Reports of problems with ESX 3.5 U1 with the following 3.5 Update 2 patch applied.
1. ESX350-200806201-UG
* No other VMware products are affected.

What has been done?

* Product and Web teams pulled the ESX 3.5 Update 2 bits from the download pages last night so no more customers will be able to download the broken build.
* VMware Engineering teams have isolated the cause of the problem and are working around the clock to deliver updated builds and patches for impacted customers.
* A Knowledgebase article has been published (http://kb.vmware.com/kb/1006716), but traffic to the knowledgebase is causing time outs. A new static page has been published at http://www.vmware.com/support/esx35u2_supportalert.html that customers and partners will be able to view.
* The phone system has been updated to advise customers of the problem
* Vmware partners have been notified of the issue.

Workarounds:

1. Do not install ESX 3.5 U2 if it has been downloaded from VMwareâ(TM)s website or elsewhere prior to August 12, 2008.
2. Set the host time to a date prior to August 12, 2008. This workaround has a number of very serious side affects that could impact product environments. Any Virtual Machines that sync time with the ESX host and serve time sensitive applications would be broken. These include, but are not limited to database servers, mail servers, & domain administration systems.

Next Steps:
VMware to notify customers who have downloaded this version and provide an update every two hours.

Resolution:

VMware Engineering has isolated the root cause and is working to produce an express patch for impacted customers today. The target timeframe is 6pm, August 12, 2008 PST.

FAQ:

1. What would this express patch do?

More information will be provided in subsequent communication updates.

2. Will VMware still reissue the upgrade media and patch bundles in the timeframe that has been communicated?

Yes. We still plan to reissue upgrade media by 6pm, August 13 PST (instead of noon, August 13 PST) and all update patch bundles later in the week. We will provide an ETA for the update patch bundles subsequently. NOTE: the "patch bundles" referred to here are for the patches listed above under "Affected Products" and the other bundles released at GA. They are not the same as the express patch which is targeted for 6pm, August 12, 2008 PST as stated above.

3. Why does VMware plan to reissue the upgrade media before the patch bundles? That is a wrong priority call!

This is not a matter of priority. Since we can get done building and testing the upgrade media before the patch bundles, we want to make that available to customers first instead of

"The parent is totally wrong - changing the time on the ESX host will _not_ affect the clocks of the guests, provided you go back in time on the host rather than forward."

This depends on configuration and reboot time. See this 25-page paper on how VMware timekeeping works. The default is that when the VMware host OS is booted, it reads the hardware CMOS time of day clock, the host OS keeps time from that point, and the current host time is exported to the client operating systems via the emulated CMOS time of day clock as they boot in virtual machines.

This default behavior can be modified. You can specify offsets between the host clock and the client clocks. You can change the host clock without changing the client clocks. You can run clock synchronization programs in the clients, and these can sync to some external time source. (NNTP tends to get unhappy because the simulated clock it sees isn't running at a constant speed.) VMWare offers client-side synchronization tools for Windows and Linux, and those won't set the client OS clock backwards during operation. During reboot of a VM, though, if the host time was set backwards, the client times will by default be reset on the next boot. It's possible to configure around this and have explicit clock offsets.

But if you just set the host CPU clock back, things are only OK until the next host reboot. Then everything resyncs to the bogus time.

Remember that in the original article, the issue is about host reboots. If the host doesn't reboot, you're OK with VMware licensing. If it does, then the trouble starts.

If someone wants to run virtual machines at home or in a small business, they're likely going to be more than satisfied with VMWare Virtual Server (formerly GSX) and wouldn't even consider the much more complex ESX.

Speak for yourself here - Anyone that knows virtualization and loves free is going to choose ESXi since it now available for free. Over the past week I've been looking at some mid-low end x86 servers specifically for this function. free + type 1 hypervisor = ESXi

Since when has windows followed specs? Lets see here, linux follows the spec and works most of the time, Microsoft embraces and extends and magically works when other things don't.

Anyways, it seems that the problem is actually due to AMI and not Foxconn itself. It appears the same problems are happening with some Asus and MSI boards too. All of which are using AMI BIOSes.

Now, if you were to read Matthew Garrett's Journal, you can see the OS checks in question. Garrett is someone of knowledge to the situation and has been attempting to help with it.

But if you look at the first link, you can see the OS check and what the options are. If the NT or Unknown or even the ME or older linux return is somehow passed back, it could be possible that there is simply no support for it or the support wasn't optimized the the board because the OSes aren't in service anymore. But you will alsoo see from that site that

To summarise:

        * There is no code in this DSDT that could determine that the system is running any Linux kernel of 2.6.9 or later. This may even be true of earlier versions - I'm not sure when _OSI support was added
        * Even if the code did manage to determine that the system was running Linux, there are no codepaths that are Linux specific. Every piece of code is run on at least one version of Windows

It can be worse when you consider the OEMB tables error. The OEMB is defined according to this VMware thread as

AMI OEMB table [Enabled]
(Set this value to allow the ACPI
BIOS to add a pointer to an
OEMB table in the Root System
Description Table (RSDT) table.
Note: OEMB table is used to pass
POST data to the AMI code
during ACPI O/S operations.)

Now, if you ask me, and I'm mostly using the power of deduction from actually paying attention to what's going on, the DSDT overrides parts of the RSdT which is modified by the OEMB. The OEMB in these AMI BIOSes maintain something that isn't compatible with any return other then the windows 2000/XP/vista return and somehow, the AMI bios is setting the linux Identity to something other then 0 which would be the Windows 2000/XP/Vista return. This is probably the root of the problem and most likely what AMI fixed to allow Foxconn to get thing going on a new bios. You have to remember that windows can also use PNP as a fall back to the OEMB information and just set the hardware setting to a sane default value based on similar chipsets and such.

But, this part is speculation on my part. What isn't speculation is that Malice on Foxconns part isn't at play.

To add to this, VMware also has a Lab Manager product: http://www.vmware.com/products/labmanager/ that could be really useful for this purpose.

It allows you to create "fenced" groups of VMs such that you can block traffic from going outside of the group or specify how you want the traffic to flow. Once you've found something you can snapshot or clone it and share it with other members of your team without affecting your own copy. While these VMs are fenced, there will be no MAC or IP address conflicts even between the clones of these VMs.

Full disclosure: I work on this product but thought it might be helpful because we have customers who already use it for similar projects.

I find it reliable, simple to use, and reasonable to configure. It is especially good if you still need to use Windows, but want to use a Linux OS.

I suppose it is if all you're doing is running a single VM in isolation, and the built-in NAT networking is good enough for your purposes. It isn't if you're running multiple VMs that need to interact with one another as well as physical hosts on a real Ethernet network.

Yeah I have seen a couple of doozies - but a few minutes Googling helped me sort the problems out. I like to know the source code is there should I need it to resolve problems.

See, the way I view it is that I shouldn't have to hit the source code for minor quibbles, and that readable, comprehensible error messages are far more valuable than available source. Most people cannot read or understand arbitrary source code or its structure (and this is even true of many programmers). Most people will, however, be able to tell what a proper error message is saying.

I think plenty of users wouldn't have the same restrictions as you do.

Probably. Most people don't run a 32-bit userspace with a 64-bit kernel. However, 64-bit guest support is a fundamental feature, and it's a restriction not to support 64-bit guests. Most of the guest OSes I run are 32-bit, but I do have some 64-bit Windows, Solaris and FreeBSD guest OSes that I want to virtualize. As it is right now, I have three options: VMware, Xen 3.x and kvm, of which VMware is the best-performing by far. VirtualBox, of course, doesn't support it.

I come from a windows background, and I find the GUI setup brilliant. I tried kvm, but I found it complex, and I couldn't get some features working (e.g. multi-core support, networking, ACPI problems). I would like multi-core support in VirtualBox but it isn't a biggie.

Perhaps you should give the free of charge VMware Server a try as well.

VMWare Workstation allows you to create quite advanced snapshot trees. You can move back and forward between snapshots, delete snaphots, start new branches at arbitrary snaphots, etc. Think of it as source control + branching for your VM.

VMWare 6.0 is supposed to allow you to record, then replay and debug the state of a VM as well.

VMWare Workstation allows you to create quite advanced snapshot trees. You can move back and forward between snapshots, delete snaphots, start new branches at arbitrary snaphots, etc. Think of it as source control + branching for your VM.

VMWare 6.0 is supposed to allow you to record, then replay and debug the state of a VM as well.

The only problem with VMWare is that they don't support any 64bit Host OS

The documentation states otherwise and you will notice the release date for VMware workstation 5.5.2 -- with 64bit Host support -- was May 2006. I have used a 64bit Host OS for VMware workstation for nearly that long.

If you are stating the free ESX Server does not support 64bit Host OS, the GSX documentation from December 2005 specifically states Windows Server 2003 x64 can be used as the host OS.

Have you tried looking at VMware lately?

The only problem with VMWare is that they don't support any 64bit Host OS

The documentation states otherwise and you will notice the release date for VMware workstation 5.5.2 -- with 64bit Host support -- was May 2006. I have used a 64bit Host OS for VMware workstation for nearly that long.

If you are stating the free ESX Server does not support 64bit Host OS, the GSX documentation from December 2005 specifically states Windows Server 2003 x64 can be used as the host OS.

Have you tried looking at VMware lately?

is the lack of a service console--no command line. I have a few Dell 2550(?) that for some reason have CDrom issues that I need console access for.

It is possible, though unsupported, to SSH in to ESXi. This doesn't have the same functionality as the service console, as you're probably aware. It's enabled on one or more of the ESXi servers we use, (for development, not production, lest the flames ensue), and is handy in a pinch. Paul Lalonde posted instructions in the community at http://communities.vmware.com/message/881978;jsessionid=529C6EC4C2DAD952438F591A8052BBBB quoting his instructions...

1. Boot your ESXi server, wait for it to finish loading, and then do the following:
2. ALT-F1 to change to the main console
3. Type 'unsupported' (you will not be able to see what you're typing)
4. When prompted, enter the root user's password
5. Type: vi /etc/inetd.conf
6. Find the line that begins with #ssh
7. Cursor over the first 's' and press the 'i' key (for insert mode)
8. backspace, esc
9. Type SHIFT+colon (:) and then 'wq!' to write and exit
10. Type 'ps | grep inetd' to find the inetd process
11. Send the hangup signal to the process ID output from step 10 with: kill -s HUP
12. You can now SSH into your ESXi server

HTH

The ESXi footprint is only 32mb. It can just be an extra chip on the motherboard.

And yet the ESXi .iso file you download from VMware is 249,462,784 bytes

You can find a FAQ.

I haven't looked at ESXi in depth. The biggest missing component I see is the lack of a service console--no command line. I have a few Dell 2550(?) that for some reason have CDrom issues that I need console access for.

It looks like you have plenty of time to install ESXi and play with it. As long as your virtual servers aren't resource hogs, you can save bundles in hardware. If you step up to ESX and Virtual Ifrastructure, you can manage all your VM's through a single server. You can move, with VMotion VM's from one hypervisor to another (running, if they are using the same SAN), take snapshots (and restore!) of running machines live. virtualizaiton makes your life so much easier.

Guess I am a bit of a fan-boi.

I checked out the datasheet here(PDF), and ESXi is just the small-footprint operating system on-top of which you can run multiple virtual machines.

So instead of having a fullblown Windows/Linux installation, you install this, and the smaller footprint leaves more resources for the guest OSes.

Am I right? And what is the software that you need to manage ESXi?

Oh, this is going to be fun, I can hardly wait! BTW the download link in TFA appears to be broken, you can get it here.

I don't think this is dramatically different from VMWare's EULA, which specifically precludes users from sharing performance analysis/comparisons of their products without their express consent. Of course, it's a bit more draconian, but it's not entirely unprecedented:

You may use the Software to conduct internal performance testing and benchmarking studies, the results of which you (and not unauthorized third parties) may publish or publicly disseminate; provided that VMware has reviewed and approved of the methodology, assumptions and other parameters of the study. Please contact VMware at benchmark@vmware.com to request such review.

Original source of the VMWare Server EULA (as an example) posted here.

And good luck getting their consent if the comparison isn't favorable...

I'm sure I'm not the only one at their without any choice in OS simply because my computer is most often used for games.

You may be in luck. VMWare has beta support for directX. http://www.vmware.com/support/ws55/doc/ws_vidsound_d3d.html

Try this:

http://www.vmware.com/appliances/directory/

I binded my Winkeys for K's Start Menu in the past, but it caused problems with VirtualBox with Windows XP Pro. SP2 guest. KDE and it fought. One time, it made my X not respond correctly. Killing failed to fix it. I had to reboot Linux/Debian. :(

I had no problems with VMware Workstation v5 with Windows 2000 SP4 guest.

Has anyone had this problem before or know how to fix it?

Why not do a complete rewrite, break compatibility, then build in something like VMWare fusion for compatibility mode: http://www.vmware.com/products/fusion/

They have the code and the rights to Windows XP. Just make an application layer that runs WinXP stuff in a manner similar to how VMware Fusion does.

I can't upgrade IE.

FWIW You can run IE6 and IE7 on the same machine fairly easily.

• Using a separate binary in Windows
• IEs4Linux using Wine in Linux
• Using VPC or Vmware

Or better, use VMware, VirtualBox, dual boot, etc. Clean and easier to maintain.

Oh sure, Linux has it's place in the desktop realm, but so does Windows. I mean come on! I have to manage my Linux clusters from Windows ONLY! (VMware ESX)

http://pubs.vmware.com/vi301/install/wwhelp/wwhimpl/common/html/wwhelp.htm?context=install&file=install_requirements.4.4.html

"I have no idea how to do it in Windows"

Free as in beer, smoothwall express http://www.smoothwall.org/get/vmware.php
vmware player http://www.vmware.com/products/player/

you do have to play around with your network configuration to route it through smoothwall in the vmware player, and i don't know if you can have vmware player automatically load the smoothwall vm on boot, but there probably is a way.

a smoothwall VM will need a little cpu resource and a little ram, not as much as a full desktop linux would need though, and i've had a full debian desktop using 128 mb of ram..

at anyrate, yes you can do it in windows.

Are the any VM's fast enough to decode video with good sound without skipping?

Perhaps VMware Fusion, it supports directx 9 (without shaders, but not needed for video).

I have VMware workstation currently which has 8.1 directX support. I haven't tried playing an HD movie or even a dvd yet on it, but I haven't thought about it till now, perhaps I'll try and see how it fairs. I currently have fedora 9 x64 on there with GDM.

Linux runs WinE and VMWare
WinE and VMWare let you run Windows Apps*
Therefore, Linux can run Windows Apps.
QED.

What was the problem, again?

*obviously, not ALL of them, but the typical ones you mentioned are supported.

Much easier to do if your workload is vuirtualized.

Distributed Power Management

The general approach of stacking load efficiently to minimize power consumption is not a new concept. There's already a commercial implementation of this idea: VMware Distributed Power Management (part of DRS: http://www.vmware.com/products/vi/vc/drs.html). It will move virtual machines around to the minimum number of servers, then power down unneeded machines. When the workload increases, DPM will automatically bring the powered-down machines back online.

(This is not meant to disparage the paper, which does a good job of measuring the various trade-offs involved in power management, with a focus on network-related issues.)

There are some inroads happening regarding running OSX on a VM, particularly with OSX server. Costs you an extra license, but it's what people have been asking for. Check out the VMWare site, and search for OSX server. Here is a link: http://blogs.vmware.com/vmtn/2008/01/virtual-leopa-1.html

I think virtualisatioin is green. It is more ifficient use of resources, the same as building a more efficient vehicle. http://www.vmware.com/solutions/consolidation/green/

Actually, just wait. This is just mindless speculation, but don't you think it is interesting that VMWare bought Thinstall?

All of a sudden, you have an application that can emulate a whole machine, merging with something that can take an application an all its dependencies and wrap it into a single executable. Call me crazy, but I think you will start seeing a product where you can wrap your favorite app, along with an underlying supporting OS running on a virtual machine, to target any other OS you want.