Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] New system planning comments
On 04/18/21 12:05 PM, Carl Brewer wrote: Ten years ago a VM was not viable for building OI, but 14 cores and 64 GB of DRAM seems to me likely to handle it. Is an OI VM running on top of OI viable for building and testing? In particular, how good is VBox for that? it's become very Windows host oriented. I'm also aware the Solaris USB support is not very good. I'll have Win 7 and Debian available running native on a Z400 if USB proves an issue for working with microcontrollers which is my primary use case for both of those. FWIW I use VBox on OI to host a bunch of GNU/Linux and NetBSD servers on a couple of basic Intel i5 consumer-grade PCs with 32GB of RAM. Runs fine, I'm not doing anything that uses a GUI, it's all just a virtual server that I get into using SSH. It depends on what you're trying to get your guests to do and how much risk you're prepared to accept. For my use case (virtualised UNIX servers to run Moodle, BIND, postfix etc) it's a very capable solution, cheap and so far (more than 10 years) bombproof. I knocked up some rudimentary start up scripts that use VNC to start the VBox GUI, but you can do it all just from the command line if you don't want the convenience of the VBox GUI. For me, ht VBox GUI is a compelling thing! I don't have the time to waste learning a bunch of PITA command line stuff when I can use the VBox GUI to make and manage VMs. "easy" Carl ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss Hi! I have an 4core XEON and 32GB of RAM, and never had issues running my linux/win virtualbox vms. i recently managed to switch these to bhyve zones, and dedicated one pci network adapter to a win vm, which worked flawlessly well - telling here just to give an example. VNC console is possible, after install i use SSH or RDP for win mostly. I don't know about USB passthru, but PCI seems to work well. Stephan ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] New system planning comments
On that front, I "must" mention my vboxsvc project: * https://github.com/jimklimov/vboxsvc * nee https://sourceforge.net/projects/vboxsvc Beside allowing to wrap each vbox into an SMF instance (dependencies, restarts by state monitoring and all), among other features it also has a way to get a GUI console (e.g. in a VNC session to host) to a headless VM, by save-state and resume. Hey Jim, I played around with that a little, but never got it to work. I think I just got frustrated with it, and my VNC hack was easy and worked albeit clunky and not "the right way". It was a long time ago and I didn't revisit it or spend much time on it. I'm sure it's a good solution! ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] New system planning comments
On April 18, 2021 10:05:02 AM UTC, Carl Brewer wrote: > >> Ten years ago a VM was not viable for building OI, but 14 cores and >64 GB of DRAM seems to me likely to handle it. Is an OI VM running on >top of OI viable for building and testing? In particular, how good is >VBox for that? it's become very Windows host oriented. I'm also aware >the Solaris USB support is not very good. I'll have Win 7 and Debian >available running native on a Z400 if USB proves an issue for working >with microcontrollers which is my primary use case for both of those. > >FWIW I use VBox on OI to host a bunch of GNU/Linux and NetBSD servers >on >a couple of basic Intel i5 consumer-grade PCs with 32GB of RAM. Runs >fine, I'm not doing anything that uses a GUI, it's all just a virtual >server that I get into using SSH. It depends on what you're trying to >get your guests to do and how much risk you're prepared to accept. For > >my use case (virtualised UNIX servers to run Moodle, BIND, postfix etc) > >it's a very capable solution, cheap and so far (more than 10 years) >bombproof. > >I knocked up some rudimentary start up scripts that use VNC to start >the >VBox GUI, but you can do it all just from the command line if you don't > >want the convenience of the VBox GUI. For me, ht VBox GUI is a >compelling thing! I don't have the time to waste learning a bunch of >PITA command line stuff when I can use the VBox GUI to make and manage >VMs. "easy" > >Carl > > >___ >openindiana-discuss mailing list >openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org >https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss On that front, I "must" mention my vboxsvc project: * https://github.com/jimklimov/vboxsvc * nee https://sourceforge.net/projects/vboxsvc Beside allowing to wrap each vbox into an SMF instance (dependencies, restarts by state monitoring and all), among other features it also has a way to get a GUI console (e.g. in a VNC session to host) to a headless VM, by save-state and resume. Also can praise phpVirtualbox as a decent and useful web-gui to a VBox host. Jim Klimov -- Typos courtesy of K-9 Mail on my Android ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] New system planning comments
My use cases for VMs are running CAD and EDA software on Win 7 and Debian and Firefox on Hipster so a local display is essential. I have no application for a server other than to do backups. Reg On Sunday, April 18, 2021, 07:46:22 AM CDT, Carl Brewer wrote: On 18/04/2021 9:44 pm, Andreas Wacknitz wrote: > > Running VMs in VirtualBox makes only sense under certain requirements, > like eg. local display. OI has out-of-the-box better virtualization > methods: KVM and BHyve. For both you can create corresponding zones. If > possible, BHyve is the recommended new virtualisation method. VBox "just works" and is easy to manage. That's my certain requirement :) Carl ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] New system planning comments
On 18/04/2021 9:44 pm, Andreas Wacknitz wrote: Running VMs in VirtualBox makes only sense under certain requirements, like eg. local display. OI has out-of-the-box better virtualization methods: KVM and BHyve. For both you can create corresponding zones. If possible, BHyve is the recommended new virtualisation method. VBox "just works" and is easy to manage. That's my certain requirement :) Carl ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] New system planning comments
Am 4/18/21 um 12:05 PM schrieb Carl Brewer: Ten years ago a VM was not viable for building OI, but 14 cores and 64 GB of DRAM seems to me likely to handle it. Is an OI VM running on top of OI viable for building and testing? In particular, how good is VBox for that? it's become very Windows host oriented. I'm also aware the Solaris USB support is not very good. I'll have Win 7 and Debian available running native on a Z400 if USB proves an issue for working with microcontrollers which is my primary use case for both of those. FWIW I use VBox on OI to host a bunch of GNU/Linux and NetBSD servers on a couple of basic Intel i5 consumer-grade PCs with 32GB of RAM. Runs fine, I'm not doing anything that uses a GUI, it's all just a virtual server that I get into using SSH. It depends on what you're trying to get your guests to do and how much risk you're prepared to accept. For my use case (virtualised UNIX servers to run Moodle, BIND, postfix etc) it's a very capable solution, cheap and so far (more than 10 years) bombproof. I knocked up some rudimentary start up scripts that use VNC to start the VBox GUI, but you can do it all just from the command line if you don't want the convenience of the VBox GUI. For me, ht VBox GUI is a compelling thing! I don't have the time to waste learning a bunch of PITA command line stuff when I can use the VBox GUI to make and manage VMs. "easy" Carl Running VMs in VirtualBox makes only sense under certain requirements, like eg. local display. OI has out-of-the-box better virtualization methods: KVM and BHyve. For both you can create corresponding zones. If possible, BHyve is the recommended new virtualisation method. Typically they are both faster and more robust than running VBox as they are first-class members of illumos, unlike VBox, BHyve being the fastest. As they are both integrated in SMF via zones management if you want, they are better suited for server environments. I recommend to make yourself familiar with them. Regards, Andreas ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] New system planning comments
Ten years ago a VM was not viable for building OI, but 14 cores and 64 GB of DRAM seems to me likely to handle it. Is an OI VM running on top of OI viable for building and testing? In particular, how good is VBox for that? it's become very Windows host oriented. I'm also aware the Solaris USB support is not very good. I'll have Win 7 and Debian available running native on a Z400 if USB proves an issue for working with microcontrollers which is my primary use case for both of those. FWIW I use VBox on OI to host a bunch of GNU/Linux and NetBSD servers on a couple of basic Intel i5 consumer-grade PCs with 32GB of RAM. Runs fine, I'm not doing anything that uses a GUI, it's all just a virtual server that I get into using SSH. It depends on what you're trying to get your guests to do and how much risk you're prepared to accept. For my use case (virtualised UNIX servers to run Moodle, BIND, postfix etc) it's a very capable solution, cheap and so far (more than 10 years) bombproof. I knocked up some rudimentary start up scripts that use VNC to start the VBox GUI, but you can do it all just from the command line if you don't want the convenience of the VBox GUI. For me, ht VBox GUI is a compelling thing! I don't have the time to waste learning a bunch of PITA command line stuff when I can use the VBox GUI to make and manage VMs. "easy" Carl ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] New system planning comments
I'm not familiar with that as I have never learned python, but I should be able to create a package for it. I have numerous friends who do use python. I'd *really* like to get Octave to compile, but they have borked autotools so badly it is hopeless unless I write a new Makefile. In the meantime I use Debian for Octave. Thanks for pointing it out. Have Fun! Reg On Saturday, April 17, 2021, 03:37:42 PM CDT, private mail openbabel wrote: Dear all, Planning ahead. It would be nice to compile Anaconda for science sometime in the future. Regards, Robert https://www.ch.cam.ac.uk/computing/software/anaconda-scientific-python-distribution On 17/04/2021 18:24, Reginald Beardsley via openindiana-discuss wrote: > I'm about to set up an HP Z840 with 1x 14 core E5-2690 V4, a 4x 4 TB RAIDZ2 > array and 4x 16 GB ECC DIMMs. > > The dbx implementation in the Oracle/Sun/Forte compiler suite is the only > debugger I've encountered which will evaluate F77 intrinsics on the command > line. This is immensely valuable to a scientific programmer. Without that > one must use temporary variables when debugging. While the optimization > process will remove the overhead, it makes the code quite long winded and > ugly. > > I currently have Studio 12.1 on Hipster 2017.10 and have not seen any issues, > though more serious work has been done on my S10 u8 system. I tend to prefer > mixed F77 and C89 for reasons of portability and the vast number of high > quality scientific libraries available. > > It seems to me that 14 cores and 64 GB of DRAM should be sufficient to run > S11.4 in a VM if I *really* need the latest Studio version. The Z840 will > take 12 more DIMMs so I can easily expand memory and add a 2nd 14 core > E5-2690 V4 if needed. > > This inclines me to use Hipster as the base OS and use VirtualBox to run > S11.4, Win 7, Debian and an OI build system in VMs when needed with a fall > back of a Z400 and swappable disks if MMU limitations constrain performance > too much. > > Ten years ago a VM was not viable for building OI, but 14 cores and 64 GB of > DRAM seems to me likely to handle it. Is an OI VM running on top of OI > viable for building and testing? In particular, how good is VBox for that? > it's become very Windows host oriented. I'm also aware the Solaris USB > support is not very good. I'll have Win 7 and Debian available running > native on a Z400 if USB proves an issue for working with microcontrollers > which is my primary use case for both of those. > > Thanks. > > Have Fun! > Reg > > ___ > openindiana-discuss mailing list > openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org > https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] New system planning comments
Dear all, Planning ahead. It would be nice to compile Anaconda for science sometime in the future. Regards, Robert https://www.ch.cam.ac.uk/computing/software/anaconda-scientific-python-distribution On 17/04/2021 18:24, Reginald Beardsley via openindiana-discuss wrote: > I'm about to set up an HP Z840 with 1x 14 core E5-2690 V4, a 4x 4 TB RAIDZ2 > array and 4x 16 GB ECC DIMMs. > > The dbx implementation in the Oracle/Sun/Forte compiler suite is the only > debugger I've encountered which will evaluate F77 intrinsics on the command > line. This is immensely valuable to a scientific programmer. Without that > one must use temporary variables when debugging. While the optimization > process will remove the overhead, it makes the code quite long winded and > ugly. > > I currently have Studio 12.1 on Hipster 2017.10 and have not seen any issues, > though more serious work has been done on my S10 u8 system. I tend to prefer > mixed F77 and C89 for reasons of portability and the vast number of high > quality scientific libraries available. > > It seems to me that 14 cores and 64 GB of DRAM should be sufficient to run > S11.4 in a VM if I *really* need the latest Studio version. The Z840 will > take 12 more DIMMs so I can easily expand memory and add a 2nd 14 core > E5-2690 V4 if needed. > > This inclines me to use Hipster as the base OS and use VirtualBox to run > S11.4, Win 7, Debian and an OI build system in VMs when needed with a fall > back of a Z400 and swappable disks if MMU limitations constrain performance > too much. > > Ten years ago a VM was not viable for building OI, but 14 cores and 64 GB of > DRAM seems to me likely to handle it. Is an OI VM running on top of OI > viable for building and testing? In particular, how good is VBox for that? > it's become very Windows host oriented. I'm also aware the Solaris USB > support is not very good. I'll have Win 7 and Debian available running > native on a Z400 if USB proves an issue for working with microcontrollers > which is my primary use case for both of those. > > Thanks. > > Have Fun! > Reg > > ___ > openindiana-discuss mailing list > openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org > https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
[OpenIndiana-discuss] New system planning comments
I'm about to set up an HP Z840 with 1x 14 core E5-2690 V4, a 4x 4 TB RAIDZ2 array and 4x 16 GB ECC DIMMs. The dbx implementation in the Oracle/Sun/Forte compiler suite is the only debugger I've encountered which will evaluate F77 intrinsics on the command line. This is immensely valuable to a scientific programmer. Without that one must use temporary variables when debugging. While the optimization process will remove the overhead, it makes the code quite long winded and ugly. I currently have Studio 12.1 on Hipster 2017.10 and have not seen any issues, though more serious work has been done on my S10 u8 system. I tend to prefer mixed F77 and C89 for reasons of portability and the vast number of high quality scientific libraries available. It seems to me that 14 cores and 64 GB of DRAM should be sufficient to run S11.4 in a VM if I *really* need the latest Studio version. The Z840 will take 12 more DIMMs so I can easily expand memory and add a 2nd 14 core E5-2690 V4 if needed. This inclines me to use Hipster as the base OS and use VirtualBox to run S11.4, Win 7, Debian and an OI build system in VMs when needed with a fall back of a Z400 and swappable disks if MMU limitations constrain performance too much. Ten years ago a VM was not viable for building OI, but 14 cores and 64 GB of DRAM seems to me likely to handle it. Is an OI VM running on top of OI viable for building and testing? In particular, how good is VBox for that? it's become very Windows host oriented. I'm also aware the Solaris USB support is not very good. I'll have Win 7 and Debian available running native on a Z400 if USB proves an issue for working with microcontrollers which is my primary use case for both of those. Thanks. Have Fun! Reg ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
