On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Tod Hansmann <[email protected]> wrote: > The reason to go virtual is largely one of flexibility. I can hand a small > linux VM to a friend. I can spin up a Windows server to run ASP.NET stuff > (shush, I like it, especially the new MVC4). I can spin up a VM of Hurd to > see just how ridiculous it still is. Dev server going in a test > environment with it's own lab. You know, whatever. Maybe 40 people will > ever access them in any way besides the website. My online community is > not that large and we like it that way. =c)
If you're going to be running Windows, you can just forget about OpenVZ and LXC; full virtualization is the name of the game. My recommendation would be KVM. Xen is a fine hypervisor, but it is losing popularity, and there is some excellent community support for KVM (not to mention backing from Red Hat; I think those guys may have a future). I also really liked VirtualBox the few times I played with it, but I only did so from a GUI. It has some excellent command line support, which I have never looked at, and it is quickly gaining ground. I also have it on good authority that it is very easy to manage using Salty Vagrant: https://github.com/saltstack/salty-vagrant I also just saw a message come in from Lonnie that mentions libvirt. If you're going to be using KVM (or a number of other hypers), libvirt is your friend. It's also easy to manage using Salt: http://docs.saltstack.org/en/latest/ref/modules/all/salt.modules.virt.html And yes, I realize I'm biased. -- "In order to create, you have to have the willingness, the desire to be challenged, to be learning." -- Ferran Adria (speaking at Harvard, 2011) /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
