[ncolug] Re: vm
- From: "Chuck Stickelman" <CStickelman@xxxxxxxx>
- To: <ncolug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 12:20:57 -0500
I can't see any motivation for running a Windows Hypervisor. What would that
offer over a Linux Hypervisor? Speed? Security? Flexibility?
MTBT is selling Linux Hypervisors, BTW.P
-----Original Message-----
From: "larry" <larry@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "ncolug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <ncolug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 11/23/2007 11:38 AM
Subject: [ncolug] Re: vm
Who says it is running on top of Linux? I plan on using a Windows
hypervisor.
I think Rob is on the right track. Signaling through serial or USB is
not a viable way to do it anyway. For the size of a VM server, the UPS
can be a "real" one that supports ethernet, and SNMP. Then you can have
VM's all do their own thing.
Chuck Stickelman wrote:
> Look, the Hypervisor is running ontop of Linux. From that perspective each
> Virtual Macine is a Linux process. What else could it be? If they are Linux
> processes then they will respond to Linux inter-process communications. What
> more is there for me to do? If you want, I can run a 'ps' command on
> authentic in ASG's lab and show you...
>
> The Windows/MAC OSs wn't see the SIGHUP. The Virtual Mahine layer will catch
> that and translate it into an OS-specific shutdown.
>
> This is exactly what Jim's scriCan you back up your statement that an
> instance of Windows NT appears to
> the hypervisor to be a Linux app? Even id the hypervisor is a Windows
> application? Doesn't make sense to me.
>
> I stand by my statement that a SIGHUP is meaningless to any OS other
> than Linux.
>
> Chuck Stickelman wrote:
>
>> Writing a program that sends a SIGHUP to another process upon a specific
>> event id trivial. I'm not programmer butr I could do it in a BASAH script.
>>
>> >From trhe hypervisor's point of view they are Linux apps and therefore
>> >should behaive as such. Linux apps should behaive properly when they catch
>> >a signal. The shell-script that was posted earlier effectively does just
>> >that.
>>
>> The good would be that the guest OS would initiate a shutdown upon seeing
>> the SIGHUP from the Hypervisor... Sems pretty useful to me...
>>
>> Chuck
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: "larry" <larry@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To: "ncolug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <ncolug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: 11/23/2007 9:40 AM
>> Subject: [ncolug] Re: vm
>>
>> I am quite sure I am missing things, the point of your message being
>> only one of many... that is why I am running this by you all.
>>
>> 1.) no one has verified that any hypervisor is ABLE to send a SIGHUP in
>> response to an external event
>> 2.) they are *not* "after all, Linux apps" - they are instances of
>> operating systems
>> 3.) if it did send it, what good would that do for a Windows guest? Or a
>> MAC OS guest?
>>
>>
>> Chuck Stickelman wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Larry, I think you mised the point of my prevoius message...
>>>
>>> The guests *should* shut down cleanly when the Hypervisor sends them a
>>> SIGHUP. (...regardless of why the Hypervisor sends the signal...) Sending
>>> a SIGHUP to the guest VM *should* be the same as choosing to shut it down
>>> from inside the VM...
>>>
>>> They are, afterall, just Linux apps...
>>>
>>> Of couse the UPS doesn't send the SIGHUP that's the job of the Linux
>>> Hypervisor. Which is the best choice for monitoring the UPS... Though some
>>> UPS monitoring applications have LAN awareness and can push the UPS status
>>> out to multiple systems - both Physical and Virtual...
>>>
>>> Chuck
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: "larry" <larry@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> To: "ncolug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <ncolug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Sent: 11/22/2007 10:32 PM
>>> Subject: [ncolug] Re: vm
>>>
>>> No, the guests do NOT "shut down cleanly" just because you stopped or
>>> shut down the hypervisor.
>>>
>>> You want to talk about "standards" in regard to UPS signaling
>>> behaviour?! Which of the dozen or so standards would you like to discuss?
>>>
>>> Mike wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Chuck Stickelman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> So what I hear you say is:
>>>>> Hook the UPS to the physical machine
>>>>> Have the host OS monitor the UPS's state
>>>>> When the UPS signals the host it sends a SIGHUP to the Virtual Machines
>>>>> The VMs should then interpret the SIGHUP as a Shutdown command
>>>>>
>>>>> Is that what you had in mnd?
>>>>>
>>>>> Does anyone know if that's how it works?
>>>>>
>>>>> Chuck
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Yes.
>>>>
>>>> The signal may depend on the VM design though. I would hope they have
>>>> used enough sense to honor some standard.
>>>>
>>>> This really is a near trivial problem. The guests shutdown cleanly
>>>> during a normal shutdown, yes? Why should a shutdown instituted by
>>>> UPS software or even admin written (monitoring) scripts be any different?
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>> To unsubscribe send to ncolug-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe'
>>>> in the Subject field.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
"Perception is strong and sight weak. In strategy it is
important to see distant things as if they were close and
to take a distanced view of close things."
Miyamoto Musashi (1584-1645)
To unsubscribe send to ncolug-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the
Subject field.
To unsubscribe send to ncolug-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the
Subject field.
Other related posts:
