[isapros] Re: Hyper-V is so damn kewl...
- From: "Han Valk" <Han.Valk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 15 May 2008 13:16:41 +0200
ESX 2.x and 3.x first boot the customized version of Red Hed Enterprise
Linux. This so called 'Service Console' then boots the VMkernel. Then
VMkernel then loads the Service Console as a privileged VM. The ESXi, watch
the i, does not have a Service Console and thus no Linux kernel.
________________________________
From: isapros-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Thor (Hammer of God)
Sent: Thu 5/15/2008 1:03 AM
To: isapros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
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: