At some point the future, based on my personal experience, my very own point of view, I will say the order of things will be:
- Docker - LXC - Lightvirtualization (xen/kvm) - PVM/HVM (qemu,vmware,virtualbox, any other ) If you app/task can be run in a docker container, go for it, is the best and quickest way to do it. LXC works pretty good if you app can't be run in a docker container, or you need some kind of isolation from the host machine (specific set of packages, or different OS/bit) As for now, if your host is ubuntu, (or the vm to be used for lxc) , there is a plugin for this vagrant-lxc and I have read it works and it have traction. https://github.com/fgrehm/vagrant-lxc I use Docker and lxc at command line level as for know, haven't get into those 2 with Vagrant, but I have read they work, so I suggest have a look at them as time permits. Hope this helps. Alvaro On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Brian Long <[email protected]> wrote: > @Alvaro - regarding the 2 expensive virtualizers, please see the details > earlier in this thread (it is not the desired end state). > > We have been targeting VirtualBox with our users & box files, although > we're not using provider specific configuration in our Vagrantfile. Is > there a simple way to set LXC as the provider / default virtualizer and try > starting my Vagrant VM with LXC? I'm not a Linux guru, but if it's as > simple as installing a few packages and modifying some configuration files, > I'm certainly willing to try LXC. > > - Brian > > > On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Alvaro Miranda Aguilera < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Can I ask why you are suing 2 expensive virtualizations? the performance >> should not be a surprise here. >> >> Why you need Virtualbox running inside vmware on the firstplace? >> >> Are other virtualization that are light, like LXC or Docker that should >> run faster/better. >> >> Other may be XEN or KVM, but basically a good understanding on "what you >> need" will be helpful to be able to suggest "how I should do it" if I have >> to do the same as you want.. >> >> >> >> On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Brian Long <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Thanks Mitchell, I've done that (see the attached screenshot), but >>> still the performance seems really bad. The reason for >>> double-virtualization at this point is to build out the CentOS host that >>> can then be exported and moved to a vShpere environment. Once I'm sure the >>> CentOS host is configured properly, it'll be moved to the server hypervisor >>> and no longer be run it in VMWare Fusion. My strategy was to configure and >>> check the CentOS host before exporting it, but maybe I'd be better off >>> moving to vSphere first? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 5:36 PM, Mitchell Hashimoto < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Brian, >>>> >>>> Make sure you check the box (or enable the setting) to enable >>>> virtualization extensions inside the VM. It is not on by default. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> Mitchel >>>> >>>> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Brian Long <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> > Mitchell, >>>> > Sorry, I should have clarified, I'm not running VirtualBox inside >>>> > VirtualBox. I'm running VirtualBox inside VMWare Fusion. Do you >>>> think >>>> > throwing more memory (e.g. 10 GB?) at it will help? I'm a bit >>>> desperate at >>>> > this point :) We really like Vagrant and want to build out an >>>> environment >>>> > for testing new builds. >>>> > >>>> > - Brian >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 5:25 PM, Mitchell Hashimoto >>>> > <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >> Brian, >>>> >> >>>> >> VirtualBox doesn't support running in VirtualBox. You can run >>>> >> VirtualBox in another VM (VMware) usually, but it is very expensive. >>>> >> >>>> >> Best, >>>> >> Mitchell >>>> >> >>>> >> On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Brian Long <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >> > Is there a trick to getting VirtualBox to run smoothly inside a >>>> linux >>>> >> > VM? >>>> >> > I've followed a few different tutorials for installing VirtualBox >>>> in >>>> >> > CentOS, >>>> >> > which typically include installing DKMS, kernel-devel & >>>> kernel-headers. >>>> >> > The >>>> >> > latest advice I saw indicated that IPv6 networking might be the >>>> slowness >>>> >> > culprit, but even with that disabled my VMs still run slowly. Any >>>> >> > tutorials, pointers or even someone's bash history would be greatly >>>> >> > appreciated :) >>>> >> > >>>> >> > On May 9, 2014 3:27 PM, "blong" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> Mitchell, >>>> >> >> Thanks for getting back to me so quickly & thanks for the info. >>>> I am >>>> >> >> trying to run VirtualBox inside VMWare Fusion. Later on, the >>>> goal is >>>> >> >> to >>>> >> >> move the VMWare fusions instance to VCenter. I'm not sure if it's >>>> >> >> helpful, >>>> >> >> but my "VAGRANT_LOG=debug" output is attached. >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> Thanks, >>>> >> >> Brian >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> On Friday, May 9, 2014 3:16:57 PM UTC-4, Mitchell Hashimoto wrote: >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> VirtualBox itself doesn't support VirtualBox running in >>>> VirtualBox. >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> VMware this works fine. >>>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 11:56 AM, blong <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >> >>> > I'm assuming this isn't recommended, but stay with me! I'm >>>> trying >>>> >> >>> > to >>>> >> >>> > configure a CentOS environment to run VirtualBox and Vagrant >>>> without >>>> >> >>> > any >>>> >> >>> > issues. A while back, I was able to successfully nest the >>>> >> >>> > "hashicorp/precise32" VM running in VirtualBox within another >>>> >> >>> > "hashicorp/precise32" VM running in VirtualBox (as long as >>>> >> >>> > VT-x/AMD-V >>>> >> >>> > is >>>> >> >>> > enabled). It's been so long, that I can't exactly remember, >>>> but I >>>> >> >>> > might >>>> >> >>> > have been running CentOS inside the precise32 VM, or >>>> vice-versa. >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> > I've installed both VirtualBox and Vagrant in CentOS (multiple >>>> >> >>> > experiments >>>> >> >>> > using various versions of each), but no matter what I do my >>>> inner VM >>>> >> >>> > runs >>>> >> >>> > slowly. I don't expect this, since I gave the CentOS VM more >>>> than >>>> >> >>> > 7GB >>>> >> >>> > of >>>> >> >>> > memory, and 2 cores from a 2.7GHz Core i7 (real hardware). >>>> When I >>>> >> >>> > try >>>> >> >>> > to >>>> >> >>> > startup my inner VM's (with or without Vagrant) they run >>>> slowly, and >>>> >> >>> > don't >>>> >> >>> > seem to allocate much memory. As the VM is booting, I see CPU >>>> 1 & 2 >>>> >> >>> > spike a >>>> >> >>> > bit, then eventually drop, but the total memory usage by CentOS >>>> >> >>> > doesn't >>>> >> >>> > rise >>>> >> >>> > above 1GB (via CentOS' System Monitor). When trying to start >>>> the >>>> >> >>> > "precise32" >>>> >> >>> > VM, it times out like this: >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> > [me@localhost hashicorp-precise32]$ vagrant destroy >>>> >> >>> > default: Are you sure you want to destroy the 'default' VM? >>>> >> >>> > [y/N] y >>>> >> >>> > ==> default: Destroying VM and associated drives... >>>> >> >>> > [me@localhost hashicorp-precise32]$ vagrant up >>>> >> >>> > Bringing machine 'default' up with 'virtualbox' provider... >>>> >> >>> > ==> default: Importing base box 'hashicorp/precise32'... >>>> >> >>> > ==> default: Matching MAC address for NAT networking... >>>> >> >>> > ==> default: Checking if box 'hashicorp/precise32' is up to >>>> date... >>>> >> >>> > ==> default: Setting the name of the VM: >>>> >> >>> > hashicorp-precise32_default_1399644995759_24359 >>>> >> >>> > ==> default: Clearing any previously set network interfaces... >>>> >> >>> > ==> default: Preparing network interfaces based on >>>> configuration... >>>> >> >>> > default: Adapter 1: nat >>>> >> >>> > ==> default: Forwarding ports... >>>> >> >>> > default: 22 => 2222 (adapter 1) >>>> >> >>> > ==> default: Booting VM... >>>> >> >>> > ==> default: Waiting for machine to boot. This may take a few >>>> >> >>> > minutes... >>>> >> >>> > default: SSH address: 127.0.0.1:2222 >>>> >> >>> > default: SSH username: vagrant >>>> >> >>> > default: SSH auth method: private key >>>> >> >>> > default: Warning: Connection timeout. Retrying... >>>> >> >>> > default: Warning: Connection timeout. Retrying... >>>> >> >>> > default: Warning: Connection timeout. Retrying... >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> > ... # Omitted for brevity >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> > default: Warning: Connection timeout. Retrying... >>>> >> >>> > Timed out while waiting for the machine to boot. This means >>>> that >>>> >> >>> > Vagrant was unable to communicate with the guest machine within >>>> >> >>> > the configured ("config.vm.boot_timeout" value) time period. >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> > If you look above, you should be able to see the error(s) that >>>> >> >>> > Vagrant had when attempting to connect to the machine. These >>>> errors >>>> >> >>> > are usually good hints as to what may be wrong. >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> > If you're using a custom box, make sure that networking is >>>> properly >>>> >> >>> > working and you're able to connect to the machine. It is a >>>> common >>>> >> >>> > problem that networking isn't setup properly in these boxes. >>>> >> >>> > Verify that authentication configurations are also setup >>>> properly, >>>> >> >>> > as well. >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> > If the box appears to be booting properly, you may want to >>>> increase >>>> >> >>> > the timeout ("config.vm.boot_timeout") value. >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> > I posted a comment on StackOverflow about this, but I'm not >>>> sure if >>>> >> >>> > that >>>> >> >>> > will drum up a response from the guy who appears to have had >>>> success >>>> >> >>> > with a >>>> >> >>> > nested VM arrangement: >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> > >>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/17175696/running-vagrant-inside-vmware-vm/22931930#comment36172153_22931930 >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> > Would anyone be able to help me get this working? >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> > Thanks in advance! >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> > -- >>>> >> >>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>> Google >>>> >> >>> > Groups >>>> >> >>> > "Vagrant" group. >>>> >> >>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from >>>> it, >>>> >> >>> > send >>>> >> >>> > an >>>> >> >>> > email to [email protected]. >>>> >> >>> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> -- >>>> >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic >>>> in the >>>> >> >> Google Groups "Vagrant" group. >>>> >> >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >>>> >> >> >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/vagrant-up/6YHdRupCKuI/unsubscribe. >>>> >> >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email >>>> to >>>> >> >> [email protected]. >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >> > >>>> >> > -- >>>> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> >> > Groups >>>> >> > "Vagrant" group. >>>> >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>> send >>>> >> > an >>>> >> > email to [email protected]. >>>> >> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >> >>>> >> -- >>>> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in >>>> the >>>> >> Google Groups "Vagrant" group. >>>> >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >>>> >> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/vagrant-up/6YHdRupCKuI/unsubscribe >>>> . >>>> >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >>>> >> [email protected]. >>>> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups >>>> > "Vagrant" group. >>>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, >>>> send an >>>> > email to [email protected]. >>>> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >>>> Google Groups "Vagrant" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/vagrant-up/6YHdRupCKuI/unsubscribe. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >>>> [email protected]. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Vagrant" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the >> Google Groups "Vagrant" group. >> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/vagrant-up/6YHdRupCKuI/unsubscribe. >> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to >> [email protected]. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Vagrant" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Vagrant" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
