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 ValkSent: 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 andabove 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. TheUnisys ES7000 is one platform which I consider "hardware-basedvirtualization". The Egenera BladeFrames and Blades are another. The prioruses Server Sentinal (IIRC) to manage the hardware, and the latter PANManager 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' OSin the equation.I had thought Hyper-V was hosted on Server 2008 and I know ESX is hosted onLinux. 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 youjust "saying"? :)Egenera looks pretty good for hardware-based virtualization, though. The client I'm working at currently will probably be setting up a couple ofchassis sometime in the near future. Should be interesting. -- Cordially yours, Jerry G. Young IIOn Sun, May 11, 2008 at 9:54 AM, Jim Harrison <Jim@xxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote: Regardless of the source, hardware-based virtualizationoutperforms software-based virtualization hands down. In the grand scheme of things, this point will be second only to the "religion" motivating customerstoward one virtualization technology or another.SCVMM is intended to be the management tool of choice; that'swhy they're building it.RC1 should hit the streets soon; it'll be well worth the timeto 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 doccoon 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 thebill 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>
