On Wednesday 18 March 2009 21:19:08 [email protected] wrote: > > Well XenServer 5 would do it, but it's not FOSS. > > Virtualbox *might* if it's Solaris 10 (I haven't gotten 9 working yet), > > pretty sure the others will work - Windows will and I find it faster on > > my laptop than on bare metal. > > Yes, it's Solaris 10. I was under the impression that Virtualbox was > focused more on desktop virtualisation and is less geared for servers. > Is that incorrect? > > > Xen is pretty powerful, but there is still a lack of good, solid > > management tools that cover HA, iSCSI integration, replication, migration > > etc etc. > > A lack of good management tools is what concerns me. I want to get > productive quickly and not have to spend unnecessary time setting up > and managing. I don't need zillions of features, but I do want > something that's solid and easy to use.
I have not been able to get VMWARE to keep time on my dual AMDs despite trying all the solutions I could find. (Guest loses 5min /hour !!!!!) VirtualBox works a treat for me. Used to was that the network setup to run as a server was hard-work, but is now as easy as VMWARE. Despite making progress in this area, VirtualBox does not like tickless or 1000Hz kernels. I recompile my CentOS kernels to use 100Hz and the host clock rate drops to Idle. Xp, ubuntu and suse guests seem to be fine with no fiddling. So I see no disadvantages in VB as a server. My servers all run an X + GUI for admin when you want, heck I even have LTSP Thin Clients using gPXE on a few MB disk, but network boot using PXE is a dream (achieved by some but oh so messy) 'Cause I want USB (and cause I'm pragmatic) I use only the sun version not the FOSS one. Jaames -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
