Slashdot Mirror
Red Hat Pledges 'Integrated Virtualization'
OSS_ilation writes "Red Hat was all about virtualization in a recent announcement for an 'integrated virtualization' initiative with XenSource and chipmakers AMD and Intel. The move was seen as a way for Red Hat to bring its commitment to virtualization technology into 'sharper focus [...] with the release of a product roadmap that includes virtualization technology built into its enterprise version of Linux.' Red Hat's CTO, Brian Stevens, said the move would remove the complex 'rocket science' aspect of virtualization, and drive the technology into more enterprises as a result."
I'm sorry, obviously I don't need it, because I don't have a clue what it is. What is this "virtualization"? Linky, please?
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
I'm wondering if they aren't just going to Include Xen, this would explain the sudden push on Xen's part to get a working FC4 installer out the door.
:) Either way you go this is going to be a good thing.
.. people are going to need help with this for years to come. I think it will help us do what we like doing (plan networks) instead of worrying so much about the semantics of getting (x software) installed and working. This means easier work, quicker turnover and more clients.
/dev/shm allowing execution, and other (seemingly) little quirks that allow so much spam to wind its way throughout the internet. They're catching up, it seems with just how people are using their product, hosting web sites (broadly). I hope they also make it safer in the process so that whatever layer they use for virtualization doesn't also get a rep for being insecure.
I'm not the world's biggest RH fan as far as using it, however I do respect that RH basically made Linux the household word that it is.
The end result, regardless of the politics is going to be web sites and databases remaining available to visitors a larger percent of the time, and end users getting a firmer grasp on how their OS works
For consultants specializing in helping to bring virtualization to the table for their clients, fear not
My concern is RH distributes (stock) very insecurely. My hope is they also address issues like
I'm not a huge Fedora fan, but I do respect them enough to withold judgement until I see what they put out. I guess you could count me as 'cautious, but anxious' to see it.
Probably RTFA, trying to figure out WTF 'Integrated Virtualization' means.
A blog about stuff.
What are you even talking about? VMWare? It isn't open source.
The more you know, the less you understand.
According to Wikipedia's Xen article, Xen will work with any OS if you're using a recent AMD or Intel chip with virtualization extensions, so that's not strictly speaking true.
Sure, but you shouldn't be using Linux at all as it is so slow. I just did a benchmark on my Sun Ultra 1 (143MHz Ultrasparc) running Linux (and there was couple other CPU intensive programs running the backround too, but why should they affect the results) and it was much much slower than the same benchmark on my Windows PC (3GHz P4).
In any case, do a benchmark with your workstation using Xen and without Xen. Remember to test VMWare or UML too. THEN you can say if Xen is impressive or not...
- Raynet --> .
For all intents and purposes Xen is the far better solution. I was looking for an alternative to VMWare and I did look over UML. The slow performance of UML alone was a major issue for me and I'm certain a lot of other people here would agree. Plus a lot of us aren't just virtualizing dumb services like Apache. We're virtualizing PVRs, Asterisk PBXs and GNOME or KDE application servers. Xen does that without breaking a sweat. It might be a bit more difficult to set up (not that hard if you know how to compile your own kernel) than UML, but the benefits are far greater. UML cannot, for example, virtualize a 3D accelerator card. Xen can as long as the driver is open. I dont believe you can assign a UML session to only use specific real hardware in your box (this is hand for running multiple PVRs on the same box with multiple video capture cards). And UML definitely can't do a live migration from one physical host to another with NO downtime. That's right. I can have VM1 running on HOST-A, but... I need to take HOST-A down for some repairs and I don't want the services on VM1 to stop. So... I set up HOST-B to take over for HOST-A and tell VM1 to migrate from HOST-A to HOST-B. Type a simple command and it's done. VM1 is now fully running on HOST-B and I can down HOST-A with NO impact to users. The only other thing you need is centralized storage (which anyone doing VMs SHOULD be using. Lookup GNBDs and NBDs.) on a separate host and all hosts must exist in the same network.
Xen is one of the best virtualization platforms our there and with the support of AMD's Pacifica and Intel's Vanderpool, it will even support running (yuck) Windows VMs when you need to. Sorry, but Xen is lightyears ahead of UML unless all you intend to host is some simple internet services.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
What are you talking about? - XEN is /*virtualization/*, sure its more than an advanced chroot, but it lacks security because there is no real isolation from the underlaying kernel and it requires you to jump through hoops to get going (ok, nice that Redhat bundle it, true).
/*emulation/* -- its like comparing wine to vmware. Apples to Oranges.
UML on the other hand is
UML has far superior isolation from the underlaying kernel, it runs entirely in userspace so no jumping through hoops, and it is the same speed as XEN for CPU bound applications like number crunching (although much slower for I/O bound applications).
So each has major advantages/disadvantages but for a mission critical server, I would choose UML every time.