Server Virtualization

[alexander]

UML - user-mode linux, is a set of patches that allows you to run a linux kernel as a process on linux. you can make milk files and have magically resetable to stock UMLs that write everything to a file so you can see what went wrong.

vmware - runs on linux

Xen - open-source server virtualizer

Virtual Iron - great server virtualization soft based on Xen

Linux Virtual Server

OpenVZ

 

there are more projects on server virtualization on linux... you can get vmware and xen for free...

some of these will virtualize windows servers as well as linux ones, and do wonders for resource management, just check out virtual iron...

[LaurieAG]

The impression I got from it was that it serves mainly to cater for legacy software in the company that refers and maps to individual servers, where powerful new hardware can cater for the needs of quite a few machines. We ran on average about five virtual servers to a machine, and the bank had about sixty servers at its head office in Johannesburg that we virtualised.

 

Hello Boerseun,

 

That sounds almost equivalent to using WinFrame (old DOS Meta Frame) as a thin client to boost performance for legacy applications that were server intensive. With dual processors one server could handle the back end processing of around 20 users (as long as there was enough memory available on the server). 300 users for how many separate legacy applications?

 

While WinFrame handled all of the back end virtualisation automatically the downside is that it is a 'screen' server that only gathers input and passes screen changes to the user (just like a dumb terminal), all other processing is done on the server and moving graphics are blanked out to conserve bandwidth. This solution is quite OK for legacy applications that run very slowly.

[Boerseun]

Hello Boerseun,

 

That sounds almost equivalent to using WinFrame (old DOS Meta Frame) as a thin client to boost performance for legacy applications that were server intensive. With dual processors one server could handle the back end processing of around 20 users (as long as there was enough memory available on the server). 300 users for how many separate legacy applications?

 

While WinFrame handled all of the back end virtualisation automatically the downside is that it is a 'screen' server that only gathers input and passes screen changes to the user, all other processing is done on the server and moving graphics are blanked out to conserve bandwidth. This is quite OK for legacy applications that previously ran very slowly.

There's a world of difference between the two, as far as I can gather.

Server Virtualisation duplicates the *whole machine*, including drivers, OS, the works, whereas what you're talking about only splits the user end. You can, conceivably, have two servers running on the same hardware where one will ***** and moan about wrong drivers and not work, and the other run completely fine without hiccups; both running on the same hardware. This, of course, will only happen if you've installed different drivers on the two "machines". But you're perfectly able to do it, though.

[LaurieAG]

There's a world of difference between the two, as far as I can gather.

Server Virtualisation duplicates the *whole machine*, including drivers, OS, the works, whereas what you're talking about only splits the user end. You can, conceivably, have two servers running on the same hardware where one will ***** and moan about wrong drivers and not work, and the other run completely fine without hiccups; both running on the same hardware. This, of course, will only happen if you've installed different drivers on the two "machines". But you're perfectly able to do it, though.

 

My last 'edit' referred to how WinFrame could be used on PC's as well as dumb terminals (because it does virtualise everything on the server, and it also optimises for multiple users running multiple versions of the same program). The dual processors smoothed off any rough edges nicely, especially when a print run started.