+ Post New Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 61
Thin Client and Virtual Machines Thread, Virtualisation of Servers in Technical; Is that documentation generated specifically for Debian, or does the actual Xen documentation relate nicely to the versions of Xen ...
  1. #31
    morganw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Cambridge
    Posts
    818
    Thank Post
    46
    Thanked 132 Times in 126 Posts
    Rep Power
    40
    Is that documentation generated specifically for Debian, or does the actual Xen documentation relate nicely to the versions of Xen that packaged for Debian?

  2. #32


    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    51.403651, -0.515458
    Posts
    9,811
    Thank Post
    262
    Thanked 2,969 Times in 2,183 Posts
    Rep Power
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by CyberNerd View Post
    The KVM stuff is all free and built into Linux.
    Have you ever tried KVM with ProxMox or Joyent's SmartOS? If so, are they any good?

  3. #33


    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,202
    Thank Post
    442
    Thanked 1,033 Times in 813 Posts
    Rep Power
    341
    Quote Originally Posted by Arthur View Post
    Have you ever tried KVM with ProxMox or Joyent's SmartOS? If so, are they any good?
    Never seen it. Looks interesting, with ZFS support!

  4. #34
    cpjitservices's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Hessle
    Posts
    2,605
    Thank Post
    544
    Thanked 301 Times in 277 Posts
    Rep Power
    85
    I have tried ProxMox, it's OK but I just couldnt get into it!

    Like I say the best option in my opinion is get CentOS, minimal install with just the Virtualization Packages. If you use CentOS 6.2 you'll get the latest versions of libvirt and virt-manager and it ..... just works now!

  5. #35


    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,202
    Thank Post
    442
    Thanked 1,033 Times in 813 Posts
    Rep Power
    341
    Quote Originally Posted by cpjitservices View Post
    I have tried ProxMox, it's OK but I just couldnt get into it!

    Like I say the best option in my opinion is get CentOS, minimal install with just the Virtualization Packages. If you use CentOS 6.2 you'll get the latest versions of libvirt and virt-manager and it ..... just works now!
    Out of interest, does centos include RHEV? "yum install rhev" or is it just a commercial app?

  6. #36

    glennda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Sussex
    Posts
    7,821
    Thank Post
    272
    Thanked 1,140 Times in 1,036 Posts
    Rep Power
    351
    I tried proxmox aswell -was rather clunky and in the end i got rid. oVirt is what i'm going to look at next as mentioned above.

  7. #37
    mmoseley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Birmingham
    Posts
    759
    Thank Post
    109
    Thanked 108 Times in 82 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    45
    Yeah - Another big thumbs up for XenServer over here, free version does exactly what we need!...I like free

  8. #38

    dhicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Knightsbridge
    Posts
    5,772
    Thank Post
    1,308
    Thanked 804 Times in 698 Posts
    Rep Power
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by morganw View Post
    Is that documentation generated specifically for Debian, or does the actual Xen documentation relate nicely to the versions of Xen that packaged for Debian?
    There's the Xen section of the Debian wiki:

    Xen - Debian Wiki

    This details installation of Xen on Debian, plus some troubleshooting for assorted issue, and I've found that there's generally a good selection of solutions available for Xen-onDebian when you search Google. That said, I've recently been trying to connect a PPPoE modem to a NIC passed through as a PCI device to a Xen virtual machine and have not been having having much success, and have not been able to find much documentation or discussion about it. It's worth noting that if you're buying a server for virtualisation, as well as making sure the chipset supports processor virtualisation, make sure it can support virtualisation of PCI devices too - it's a separat instruction set, for some reason, and it's bound to come in handy at some point.

  9. #39
    zag
    zag is offline
    zag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,002
    Thank Post
    983
    Thanked 477 Times in 398 Posts
    Blog Entries
    12
    Rep Power
    98
    Virtualization is actually very easy.

    Just install a new Windows 2008 R2 server with the hyper-v role. Start building new servers machines as and when you need them. You can even migrate a current server using a small utility like disk2vhd.

    The advantages are:

    - Quick to build new servers
    - Less hardware needed
    - Ability to backup/image any server in a few minutes
    - Easily migrate servers to new hardware or keep copies of servers on redundant hardware

    People who use Sans or specialist switches are taking virtualization to the extremes. You normally find that type of thing in big hosting companies or large companies. It works fine in schools but its a bit overkill imo. A simple server with a 500gb hard disk is enough for 5 or 6 virtual machines in my experience.
    Last edited by zag; 1st March 2012 at 10:52 AM.

  10. #40
    nicholab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Birmingham
    Posts
    1,569
    Thank Post
    4
    Thanked 101 Times in 97 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    53
    For a SAN consider dot Hill, Oracle or Dell.

    N.B. Dot Hill were OEMing kit for HP.

  11. #41

    dhicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Knightsbridge
    Posts
    5,772
    Thank Post
    1,308
    Thanked 804 Times in 698 Posts
    Rep Power
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by zag View Post
    People who use Sans or specialist switches are taking virtualization to the extremes.
    Agreed - specifically, SANs are useful when you want a larger amount of processing power compared to the amount of disk storage you have. In my experience, your average school (and, perhapse, other organisations, too) with an average Windows-based network wants lots of file storage space - user areas, shared areas, storage for photos, storage for videos, backups for everything, etc. Rather than spend your money on something capable of acting as a central file store, simply buy more disks to distribute around your servers.

  12. #42

    garethedmondson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Gowerton, Swansea
    Posts
    2,309
    Thank Post
    973
    Thanked 327 Times in 195 Posts
    Blog Entries
    11
    Rep Power
    170
    Quote Originally Posted by dhicks View Post
    Agreed - specifically, SANs are useful when you want a larger amount of processing power compared to the amount of disk storage you have. In my experience, your average school (and, perhapse, other organisations, too) with an average Windows-based network wants lots of file storage space - user areas, shared areas, storage for photos, storage for videos, backups for everything, etc. Rather than spend your money on something capable of acting as a central file store, simply buy more disks to distribute around your servers.
    Right - interesting, so instead of 2 x servers and a SAN what sort of hardware configurations would your recommend to someone like me who hasn't a clue but it building knowledge based on what others say? It would be nice if you could provide an example.

    See my previous post in this thread for what we are planning - how would you change it? Please throw it out there for us to evaluate.

    Many thanks

    Gareth Edmondson

  13. #43


    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,202
    Thank Post
    442
    Thanked 1,033 Times in 813 Posts
    Rep Power
    341
    Quote Originally Posted by dhicks View Post
    Agreed - specifically, SANs are useful when you want a larger amount of processing power compared to the amount of disk storage you have. In my experience, your average school (and, perhapse, other organisations, too) with an average Windows-based network wants lots of file storage space - user areas, shared areas, storage for photos, storage for videos, backups for everything, etc. Rather than spend your money on something capable of acting as a central file store, simply buy more disks to distribute around your servers.

    We probably fall into the 'large amount of processing power' bracket with our terminal servers. However SAN is extremely useful for moving data between servers! moving data between server used to take days in copying, now I just mount the LUN with the new server.

  14. #44
    cpjitservices's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Hessle
    Posts
    2,605
    Thank Post
    544
    Thanked 301 Times in 277 Posts
    Rep Power
    85
    Sorry to disappoint but the free version of oVirt is rather garbage it's VERY clunky....... almost as much as Proxmox.... Proxmox is built on Debian if I remember rightly.

  15. #45
    zag
    zag is offline
    zag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,002
    Thank Post
    983
    Thanked 477 Times in 398 Posts
    Blog Entries
    12
    Rep Power
    98
    Quote Originally Posted by garethedmondson View Post
    Right - interesting, so instead of 2 x servers and a SAN what sort of hardware configurations would your recommend to someone like me who hasn't a clue but it building knowledge based on what others say? It would be nice if you could provide an example.

    See my previous post in this thread for what we are planning - how would you change it? Please throw it out there for us to evaluate.
    Personally I would forget about the SAN and just use normal hard disks in the machines.

    I virtualized my whole school for about 3k using standard 16gb ram dell servers. We have 3 of them running 12 Vm's on hyper-v.

    The whole idea of going virtual is to save on resources and make things very easy to backup/migrate so the "what if the hard disk fails" argument kind of goes out the window as long as you backup properly.

    A Backup PSU is of course a must though

    This design doesn't stop you going with a SAN or big hardware in the future. Its easy to migrate once your machines are virtual.



SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Virtualisation of Thin Client Server
    By ndavies in forum Thin Client and Virtual Machines
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 6th May 2008, 10:33 AM
  2. Number of Servers
    By dezt in forum Wireless Networks
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 30th June 2006, 12:51 PM
  3. Question about fresh install of server 2003.
    By Kyle in forum How do you do....it?
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 20th January 2006, 10:08 AM
  4. Cloning of servers
    By Ric_ in forum Windows
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 13th July 2005, 11:09 AM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •