[isapros] Re: Hyper-V is so damn kewl...
- From: Greg Mulholland <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: ISAPros Mailing List <isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 20:20:13 -0300
As per my disappearing post
ESX is not hosted on Linux per se. It is a proprietary written kernel
(vmkernel) Only the service console is 'based' on RHEL 3 update 6 with mods
Greg
Here is some more reading for those interested
http://www.venturecake.com/the-vmware-house-of-cards/
-----Original Message-----
From: isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Thor (Hammer of God)
Sent: Thursday, 15 May 2008 9:04 AM
To: ISAPros Mailing List
Subject: [isapros] Re: Hyper-V is so damn kewl...
Regarding the ESX/Linux question, it seems to be open to some debate
given it boots up on a linux kernel.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=693
t
> -----Original Message-----
> From: isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isapros-
> bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jerry G. Young II
> Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2008 3:56 PM
> To: isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [isapros] Re: Hyper-V is so damn kewl...
>
> Setting aside the specifics of what constitutes "running on top of X
> OS", I guess my real point was what I think of when someone uses the
> term "hardware virtualization".
>
> Simply put, a big box of iron will have x number of CPUs, x amount of
> RAM, x number of NICs. When someone says hardware virtualization,
> I've always understood that as being the situation where the above
> pieces and parts are "partitioned" into separate physical entities.
> One "hardware-virtualized" box may have 2 CPUs, 2 GB of RAM, and 2
> NICs allocated to it. This box then exclusively uses that hardware,
> unshared by anything else.
>
> Granted, if that box isn't fully utilized, then the excess resources
> are wasted but that's what I've understood the term to mean. If you
> got something that is sharing those resources between logical
> entities, then doesn't that controller need to sit between the
> hardware and logical entity? And in the past I have thought that
> controller was an OS, regardless of flavor or mod. That's really all
> I was trying to say.
>
> Cordially yours,
> Jerry G. Young II
> +=+ Sent via iPhone +=+
>
> On May 14, 2008, at 18:11, Greg Mulholland <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
>
> > I posted that days ago but it never made it to the list.
> > Listweirdness happening for me! :(
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:isapros-
> bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > ] On Behalf Of Han Valk
> > Sent: Wednesday, 14 May 2008 7:49 PM
> > To: ISAPros Mailing List
> > Subject: [isapros] Re: Hyper-V is so damn kewl...
> >
> > ESX does _not_ run on top of Linux! The current 3.x product use a
> > customized
> > version of Red Hed Enterprise Linux as a special VM that runs on the
> > VMkernel
> > (=hypervisor). ESXi 3.5 does not need this special VM anymore. ESX 4
> > and
> > above will not have it in any edition.
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Jerry Young
> > Sent: Mon 5/12/2008 4:21 PM
> > To: isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [isapros] Re: Hyper-V is so damn kewl...
> >
> >
> > I thought Hyper-V was part of Server 2008. I know ESX runs on top
> > of Linux.
> >
> > Perhaps my definition of "hardware-based virtualization" is
> > different. The
> > Unisys ES7000 is one platform which I consider "hardware-based
> > virtualization". The Egenera BladeFrames and Blades are another.
> > The prior
> > uses Server Sentinal (IIRC) to manage the hardware, and the latter
> PAN
> > Manager and vBlade Software. Once the virtual hardware boxes are
> > configured,
> > though, my understanding is that the passing of architecture is more
> > like
> > that which you get from a BIOS rather than software that sits on a
> > OS stack
> > to which API calls are made - if that makes any sense; there's no
> > 'host' OS
> > in the equation.
> >
> > I had thought Hyper-V was hosted on Server 2008 and I know ESX is
> > hosted on
> > Linux. I guess, I've never considered any kind of 'OS host'-based
> > virtualization as 'hardware-based' virtualization.
> >
> >
> > On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Jim Harrison <Jim@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hyper-V is hardware-based (e.g., uses the hardware
> > virtualization).
> > As of SP1, Virtual Server R2 adds "hardware-assisted"
> > virtualization.
> > AFAIK, the only VMWare product that dies this is ESX...
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jerry Young
> > Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 5:36 AM
> > To: isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: [isapros] Re: Hyper-V is so damn kewl...
> >
> > Which are you implying is hardware-based virtualization? Or
> > were you
> > just "saying"? :)
> >
> > Egenera looks pretty good for hardware-based virtualization,
> > though.
> > The client I'm working at currently will probably be setting up a
> > couple of
> > chassis sometime in the near future. Should be interesting.
> > --
> > Cordially yours,
> > Jerry G. Young II
> >
> > On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 9:54 AM, Jim Harrison
> > <Jim@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Regardless of the source, hardware-based
virtualization
> > outperforms software-based virtualization hands down. In the grand
> > scheme of
> > things, this point will be second only to the "religion" motivating
> > customers
> > toward one virtualization technology or another.
> >
> > SCVMM is intended to be the management tool of choice;
> > that's
> > why they're building it.
> > RC1 should hit the streets soon; it'll be well worth
> > the time
> > to grab & install it.
> >
> > Jim
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Greg Mulholland
> > Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2008 2:53 PM
> >
> > To: ISAPros Mailing List
> > Subject: [isapros] Re: Hyper-V is so damn kewl...
> >
> > I was most unimpressed by the hyperv management
> > console. The
> > system center/virtual machine manager was the only way I would ever
> > use it,
> > but you need to be using multiple servers to warrant that, but given
> > that the
> > vmm was built on powershell it would be a good thing to drive from
> > the cli if
> > you are so inclined. That and running (read) managing HV on SC was
> > near
> > impossible unless you had rsat or another hyperv machine you could
> > connect to
> > the console (which wasn't available at the time). You were supposed
> > to be
> > able to use wmi to drive it but I was told that MS hadn't finished
> > the docco
> > on that. It might be great when they finish it.
> >
> > Vmware beta2 has some nice things about it and you can
> > use the
> > ESX client to manage it. Having used ESX and Virtual Iron in
> > production I
> > would say they have a way to go but I'm keen to setup an environment
> > at work.
> > We have 60 or so standalone vm boxes that dev and qa use and we are
> > looking
> > at using something to consolidate them, hyperv seems like it will
> > fit the
> > bill there.
> >
> > Greg
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jim Harrison
> > Sent: Sunday, 11 May 2008 5:24 AM
> > To: ISAPros Mailing List
> > Subject: [isapros] Hyper-V is so damn kewl...
> >
> > Got my ISA 2006 server running on Hyper-V now.
> > I'll soon migrate to TMG (probably not today;
gardening
> > awaits).
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Cordially yours,
> > Jerry G. Young II
> > Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer
> >
> > <winmail.dat>
Other related posts:
