|
||||
If all your hardware is supported by Linux kernel 2.6.18, and your CPU doesn't support hardware virtualisation, and you will only be running NetBSD or Linux in your virtual machines, then Xen 3.0 (not 3.1 or 3.2) is very nice. Fairly easy to use, very fast, very lightweight.
However, if your CPU support hardware virtualisation, then go with with a Linux distro that uses kernel 2.6.24, and use Kernel-based Virtual Machine (KVM). With that, you can create virtual machines you can run *any* 32-bit or 64-bit PC-based OS (any BSD, any Linux, any Windows, etc). KVM is very easy to use, is very lightweight, is very easy to understand, and performance is very close to native (around 80% in most benchmarks). There's also paravirtual disk and network drivers available for Linux and Windows which give native I/O performance. For more info, check http:///kvm.qumranet.com/kvmwiki/ and http://www.linux-kvm.com We're moving all our VM hosts to KVM. It's just better than Xen. |
|
||||
You should use torrents.to then, I have found many Solaris releases there.
__________________
religions, worst damnation of mankind "If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened." Linus Torvalds Linux is not UNIX! Face it! It is not an insult. It is fact: GNU is a recursive acronym for “GNU's Not UNIX”. vermaden's: links resources deviantart spreadbsd |
|
||||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
B.R. satimis |
|
|||
Quote:
I have no hardware problem. I'll take your advice installing Zenwalk Linus as host and run KVM on it as virtual server. Thanks B.R. satimis |
|
||||
The latest KVM's, on boxes with the virtualization built into the processor, also do 64 bit and SMP--actually, more CPUs than VMware server. VMware server does have the ease of use thing, especially with bridged networking.
There is, by the way, a bounty out for VMware on FreeBSD and Orlando, the fellow who did the VMware 3 port, has taken it up, so there's hope that you'll get your VMware on FreeBSD one of these days. I do find VMware rather resource intensive. I don't like the direction that they seem to be going with their 2.0 beta, though I guess it's aimed at a very powerful server running several VMs. Rather than give you the console of the machine by default, it gives you a web management interface. I don't want to post misinformation, and my memory is hazy on this, but I think (and maybe someone can confirm this or correct it if it's wrong) that the 2.0 beta puts in its own version of java, and uses up port 80 (by default, which can be changed.) Not realizing this, I messed up a test installation of nagios, which could no longer use port 80 because VMware had it. In contrast, nagios and cacti can play nicely together, both using port 80. |
|
||||
Quote:
The really nice thing about KVM is that you don't have to learn a new way of networking. You use the tools in the host OS to configure the network. If you want eth0 to be your bridge, you can. If you want eth3 through eth6 to be separate bridges assigned to separate VMs, without IPs, with eth0 a management interface with an IP, you can. If you want to create a large bond0 using eth1 through eth6, and then use that for the bridge, you can. Anything you can do normally in Linux networking, you can configure for the networking for the VMs. Quote:
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Virtualization Software | ninjatux | FreeBSD Ports and Packages | 4 | 8th January 2009 08:49 PM |
Sun Java System Web Server - Active Server Pages (yes ASP) | hopla | FreeBSD General | 0 | 26th September 2008 08:22 AM |
Virtualization Software | ninjatux | General software and network | 52 | 22nd August 2008 04:18 PM |