View Single Post
  #1   (View Single Post)  
Old 12th July 2010
sharris sharris is offline
Package Pilot
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 146
Default Virtualization 2010 ?

Hello DaemonForum,

I need some advice. I am not running any production servers yet or working in the Networking field. I'm a student who finally will make it to a Web Administration class this coming fall semester and I plan to be "WAY" ahead, hopefully. Now the fun begin I already have my first home network up and running, thanks to the daemonforum, (but barely since I don't see the packets flowing, it's not secure). I'll come back latter for that. For now it's time to tighten up machine-4 on my LAN which will be use for web development and testing "FreeBSD, Arch-Linux and Windows XP" and to do and store all my homework on. I need Virtualization on this machine only. For instance; when I build a nice FreeBSD or Arch-Linux running Apaches and other programs and/or from jails I can simply copy this OS from PRIMARY-1 (dd the partition) and dd it to an dedicated web or mailserver (my machine-3) or elsewhere as long as it it can be copy to partition PRIMARY-1 on that machine hard drive. I want it to "WORK" and not carry no Virtualization junk with it. I would use jails when it come to something used for production to begin with. Is this the way its suppose to work if we choose something like this? Here's an ideas about my present setup and what I want to do with KVM or VM over ESX 4.1.I if my processor qualify.

My first Gateway and LAN:

Machine-1		FreeBSD 8.0-i386		Gateway-pf Firewall
Machine-2		Windows XP		Mainly for internet Access
Machine-3		FreeBSD 8.0-AMD		Production Test Machine-ssh-
Machine-4		KVM or VM over ESX 4.1.I	Development machine with 
                                              internal access only
I know nothing as of yesterday about VM. It was just something I heard other students were using and a line or two in the textbooks about it. It was no big deal to me. Now that I found interest, for the past few days I did some serious research with these two thread as the leader in the end ... These two threads hold truly some Great details and I never found anything else in over 48 hours that even came close when talking BSD. How lucky can one be ...

JUNE 19, 2008
Server virtualization

JUNE 30, 2008
Virtualization Software

Now, if you want to talk about hypervisors (Xen, Linux-KVM, VMWare ESX) . .. ..
and that he did ... After reading both threads a few times, it was a hands down decision for me but these thread are 2 years old. I like to know what he and others think today. I learned that most BSD users wish for VMware running FreeBSD as HOST, regardless and now I kind of understand why. I just wonder if it's out there somewhere all ready. I also think VMware brought back VMware Server Console and a few other things that phoenix pointed out back than. Not sure if that have anything to do with the native management console, i really like to know. Just a wild thought, I think VMware know how to run FreeBSD as HOST, problem is it may "RULE" and they don't want that going on right now. "FBSD-V-ware". I read about the bounty

Hope I'm not wording things wrongly but which would be the better choice today ... KVM or VM over ESX 4.1.I or something else. I want to go with the one that has hopes for FreeBSD as host someday even if I have to buy new hardware. But for now I'll go with whatever works for AMD Phenom Quad-core. It's not an Opteron so I guest it don't have build-in Virtualization. But it might have something that KVM or VM over ESX 4.1.I can use, if not, what would be the next runner-up.

I have no PRIMARY partitions to spare. Can I install KVM or VM over ESX 4.1.I to Extend partition.

Since FreeBSD is not supported as an host system, I rather use Arch-Linux as host. Are there any pro & cons when it comes to Arch-Linux vs Zenwalk or is there something more common for today use. I'm thinking of using a strip-down version of Arch-Linux or turning off what is not needed (if it help with performance). 85% performance would be just fine... anything over would be a bonus. As long as everything stays intact and don't get polluted with a bunch of add-on, especially in the guest systems i'll be happy.

I already forgot some of the stuff I read so I don't have a total understanding of hypervisor-based virtualisation and the minimum support needed from a processor to run either KVM or VM over ESX 4.1.I but I need to go ahead and post this than read more into hypervisor tonight before I get confuse.

Thanks in advance for any advice comments or ideas
Reply With Quote