But they are doing that with Vmotion and the virtual machine copy so it
stands to reason you could probably do it if you put the memory as part of
the virtual session logon. No?
*Andrew Wood <andrew.wood@.uk>* wrote:
but its instance in time - you seem to be thinking of a session in a
static state.
Say I'm working on database entry application, or a business objects
report, or in a large word document cutting anad pasting text between
various documents.
Its not good enough that the document or data entry to be saved on a
regular basis - if I want to transport my session between servers I need to
take that whole memory state for each of my running processes. Maintaining
that copy in a transient and portable way - without losing data is going to
be complicated - imo you'd have to be able to replicate memory states
between servers writing to a disk and compressing for transfer would take
too long, especially for a complex, or rapidly changing memory states.
------------------------------
*From:* thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:thin-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On
Behalf Of *Jim Kenzig http://ThinHelp.com
*Sent:* 31 July 2006 15:02
*To:* thin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [THIN] Re: To heck with Virtual Machines... I want virtual
logons!
Ok think of it this way. Your logon is sandboxed into a "virtual area of
memory" there are tools like Vizioncore for example that can take a
virtual machine and compress it while backing it up. Why not do this on the
fly for sessions? Compress, move decompress... I am not sure of the
timeframe it would take but it certainly is possible. I am not sure that
you really need to move memory other than the contents of the clipboard
anyways..with longhorn and the way it stores objects in a db instead of a
registry this all becomes possible I think. Don't think backwards about
how things work now and try and apply it, think about how things could work
and apply it and you will see it is a very viable solution.
Jim
*Jeff Pitsch <jepitsch@xxxxxxxxx>* wrote:
No, I'm talking of moving your session. You session is so much more than
simply the profile. I believe the OP was referring to moving your entire
session from one device to another. That's what I'm referencing. You would
have to take all that information (page file, physical memory, etc etc etc)
conslidate it and move it. To me, that seems a huge task to undertake and I
don't see, currently, how it would be viable.
Jeff Pitsch
Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
Forums not enough?
Get support from the experts at your business
http://jeffpitschconsulting.com
On 7/31/06, Jim Kenzig http://ThinHelp.com <http://thinhelp.com/> <
jkenzig@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Yeah..the sunray was a cool idea but you can do that with Citrix. It is
> just suspending the session and putting it in a disconnect state.. not
> really moving it anyplace.
>
> And Jeff as far as size goes. There is no fricking reason your profile
> should be that big.
> The persons data files, favorites, etc should be stored in a home
> directory on another files server. I'm talking about server based computing
> here..not your home laptop. The idea is that say for example I have 5 word
> docuements open and my session needs to be moved. The documents will be
> saved to the home directory, the session moved and then reaccessed in the
> same state as to where you left off on the new server with the same 5
> documents opened.
>
> The idea is something whose time has come and I really do believe is the
> next thing you are going to see in the virtualization world. Microsoft now
> owns all the pieces to be able to do this with it's acquisition of
> Softricity. I think MS should pay close attention to this discussion and by
> continuing it here we could work out all the possible scenarios and details
> of what such a system would entail.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>
> *Matt Kosht <matt.kosht@* wrote:
>
> Didn't Sun already attempt this with the Sunray? It has "hot desking"
> allowing you to disconnect and move around to other Sunrays keeping
> your session alive. Admittedly this is more a hardware solution. I
> don't think Sun ever got a lot of interest as you can do almost all of
> it with any thin client and a PS 4.0 server.
>
> http://www.sun.com/sunray/sunray2fs/
>
> I like your idea of having this software based, device and server
> independent ( a Vmotion style move of a session to another server is
> very cool). Get that C++ compiler busy Jim!
>
>
> On 7/28/06, Jim Kenzig http://ThinHelp.com <http://thinhelp.com/> wrote:
> >
> > Remember the Virtual Workplace video Citrix showed at Iforum about 4
> or 5
> > years ago? It was very Star Trekkish with a guy walking around with a
> little
> > portable computer holding a tele/video conference with people around
> the
> > world. He went from his office, to his car and then to his home where
> he
> > plugged into a cradle and brought the conference up on his giant
> plasma TV.
> > They connected people from all over the world. When the channel got
> staticy
> > and dropped and then came back up, he went Oh never mind we just
> switched
> > over to a new server.
> >
> > Ok that was Citrix's vision of access back then. Any where, any place,
> and
> > any device. Fast forward to 2006. The CPS 4 package has much of this
> > functionality.. session reliability for example and application
> isolation so
> > apps don't step on each other. Conferencing built in and more.
> >
> > Now stay with me here and I will take you on a visionary dream of mine
> and
> > eureka moment I had last evening in my sleep. (and yeah this happens
> all the
> > time)
> >
> > Maybe we are approaching this whole virtualization thing backwards.
> Instead
> > of virtualizing servers and desktops I think we should be virtualizing
> user
> > profile sessions.
> >
> > Here is my dream. You know how VMWare has that Vmotion stuff where you
> can
> > move a machine over from one physical server to another and not miss a
> beat?
> > That is pretty awesome stuff. I started thinking (while I was dreaming
> of
> > course0 why can't someone come up with a way to have multiple
> identical
> > servers with the same apps loaded on them and an admin tool that can
> take a
> > users entire logon session profile(everything they are doing) and move
> JUST
> > THE SESSION with the profile over to another machine. And then I took
> it a
> > step further. It could be automated with a tool to monitor users
> sessions
> > and move ones over that are stressing the CPU over to a less used
> machine.
> > So instead of moving a whole server or machine over just move the user
> over.
> > This is sort of what happened in the virtual workplace video.
> >
> > I'm asking how hard can this be to do? Put the entire logon into a
> "virtual
> > session profile"..everything the user is doing. If the users session
> slows
> > down they get a flag that pops up that Asks if they would like to be
> moved
> > to a less busy server, if they say yes, it saves their session state,
> tells
> > the user to hang on a sec while it moves the session profile over to a
> new
> > server and then restores and restarts the session on the new server. A
> step
> > further...give the user the option to save their session logon
> state..apps
> > open etc into a "virtual session profile" so that the could connect
> back in
> > days, weeks or even months later exactly where they left off. (and it
> > wouldn't matter which machine they connect to) With programs like
> > softricity to hold the basic backend app information something like
> this
> > should be doable. This is not the same thing as virtual desktops...I
> want
> > virtual SESSION profiles not Desktops!
> >
> > Such a virtualization method would be way more useful than virtual
> machines
> > because you could do things like create a virtual profile with
> settings that
> > would not be changed and use it across your organization, you could
> then
> > have a flex type of setup that saved session settings and personal
> files in
> > another home storage folder if necessary.
> > The benefits being you never have to reboot a server with users on it,
> you
> > can have way more users on a real server than you can on a virtual
> server
> > and you would have much more control over users sessions as you could
> set up
> > a system to monitor only the ones you want. ...ie.. always make sure
> that
> > the Directors virtual profile is sent to the least busy server. I know
> some
> > of this stuff exists today but this is the panacea I want. Think it
> will
> > ever happen? I do.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
