The downloadable version of this article is available here:
http://techrepublic.com.com/5138-3513-6066855.html
Virtualization has become a standard operating practice for many application developers. Which virtualization do you use and why?
Discussion on:
View:
Show:
We are investigating MS Virtual Server and MVWare from EMC Corp.
Both are free.
VMWare appears to be slightly better from a performance standpoint, though at the moment running two virtual machines concurrently on the same hardware has a hit on performance on both technologies. EMC has a commercial version of VMWare calles ESX which is supposed to have better performance but we have yet to test.
Anyone have other options that they recommend?
It would also be interesting to hear how people are using the technology to save on time and hardware costs.
Both are free.
VMWare appears to be slightly better from a performance standpoint, though at the moment running two virtual machines concurrently on the same hardware has a hit on performance on both technologies. EMC has a commercial version of VMWare calles ESX which is supposed to have better performance but we have yet to test.
Anyone have other options that they recommend?
It would also be interesting to hear how people are using the technology to save on time and hardware costs.
VMWare has 3 versions of their software, 2 of which have no licensing cost. They also have a no-cost player that allows you to deploy a pre-configured VM for others to use. See the VMWare site for details. I have tested VirtualPC and even though it is free, we have found VMWare to be a better product.
We use the desktop version for R&D. It has a modest licensing cost (approx $189 per user direct) and is well worth it. We create a baseline image with the OS and all dev tools and from that each developer creates and uses their own specific VM. You can backup / copy the entire VM (as it is simply a file) and if your hardware is similar enough, run it on multiple PC's.
Keep in mind that most software (including MS software) requires a separate license for each VM - not just each developer.
We also use this to run and test server software on a virtualized network. Additionally, if you use Symantec V2i for backup, you can use VMWare to boot and run the backup V2i backup image.
Virtualization is a great tool. There are some limitations of course, but overall it is a great tool.
We use the desktop version for R&D. It has a modest licensing cost (approx $189 per user direct) and is well worth it. We create a baseline image with the OS and all dev tools and from that each developer creates and uses their own specific VM. You can backup / copy the entire VM (as it is simply a file) and if your hardware is similar enough, run it on multiple PC's.
Keep in mind that most software (including MS software) requires a separate license for each VM - not just each developer.
We also use this to run and test server software on a virtualized network. Additionally, if you use Symantec V2i for backup, you can use VMWare to boot and run the backup V2i backup image.
Virtualization is a great tool. There are some limitations of course, but overall it is a great tool.
I only used VMware from 1.x till now. I don't have much experience on other virtualization software but I believe they do have the same capability of taking snapshot.
I am not a developer but I do quite a lot of testing using different configuration. VMware current version has ability to take multiple snapshots from a base virtual machine. Thus you don't have to run multiple VMs for different configuration. In addition, I can start over my test again by going back to a snapshot point.
I always do it this way to finalize the exact steps should be done. By reverse back to the starting point and replicate those steps, I can take screenshots for documentation. VMware also has other features for simulating network test environment but I think it is better not to discuss virtualization software in this discussion. I just want to highlight the beauty of virtualization in helping to do my work.
I am not a developer but I do quite a lot of testing using different configuration. VMware current version has ability to take multiple snapshots from a base virtual machine. Thus you don't have to run multiple VMs for different configuration. In addition, I can start over my test again by going back to a snapshot point.
I always do it this way to finalize the exact steps should be done. By reverse back to the starting point and replicate those steps, I can take screenshots for documentation. VMware also has other features for simulating network test environment but I think it is better not to discuss virtualization software in this discussion. I just want to highlight the beauty of virtualization in helping to do my work.
This is an incomplete article without mentioning some candidate packages for virtualisation. Naming some allows us to find more about their workings and track record. A missed opportunity. Please follow up.
I've just started to look at this issue with a view to consolidating a small network with mixed operating systems and legacy Apps. I'd be interested to hear others experience particularly with respect to cost of implemention (Hardware and operating systems)and also, what impact has virtualisation had on backup and redundancy policy? Is it easier to restore or reconfigure VM's to reduce downtime. At the moment VMWares product seem more flexible than MS and Xen, theres a lot of potential but I think we have a way to go yet. All the best
I was skimming the article just to see the list of virtualization software. Imagine my disappointment...
Lots more coverage on this topic including an in depth look at all the major players.
All TechRepublic articles get tagged. For more information on virtualization, just follow the tag:
http://techrepublic.com.com/5260-1-0.html?query=virtualization
http://techrepublic.com.com/5260-1-0.html?query=virtualization
I've never heard of virtualization as anything but a way to run different OS's at the same time... so this is all news to me. I can easily see some of the advantages to doing some of this (a permanent "state" machine, for example, to test different types of apps against specific parameters) but seems like I remember huge hits in speed and threading as a trade-off... wouldn't mind being updated a little on the current state of things
Interesting that this article only refers to virtual machines as a means to avoid DLL Hell. Altiris recently released Software Virtualization Solution, a product that allows the applications themselves to be virtulized. They are seperated from other applications so there are no conflicts. They can be turned on and off and removed from the system as if they never existed. There is even a free version available for download for home users. I wonder if someday developers will just package virtualized software rather than the standard setup program. This may save the developer companies many support calls when their software no longer has conflicts on the users computers.
I would say this is good for me to evaluate software as it maintains a separate layer for newly installed software and its related data. No DDL conflict as they are sitting on a separate layer (space). After I tested the software, I can turn it off. The real OS just back to just like nothing installed before. So, nothing left behind including registry.
If you put it in production, my experience is that data file created from the virtualized application will sit on its data layer. When you turn off the virtual application, you will not see your file created.
It has it pros and cons depending on what you want to achieve.
If you put it in production, my experience is that data file created from the virtualized application will sit on its data layer. When you turn off the virtual application, you will not see your file created.
It has it pros and cons depending on what you want to achieve.
Hopefully when you downloaded the SVS eval or the free for personal use version (http://juice.altiris.com/node/86), you saw the following: "When using SVS, it is important that you understand how data files are handled. Otherwise you may inadvertently lose data. Please take a minute to read some documentation on this at http://juice.altiris.com/node/16." Data is intended to be isolated from apps so that it can be managed separately.
I don't know the ALtiris solution, but I do know the Softgrid solution. Check out: softricity.com. The company offers already for a couple of years a product which shields applications from each other. Used together with Citrix virtual server farm makes a very powerfull tool to present applications. For me this is proven technology, which at the moment is uncertain for the Altiris product.
Virtualization seems like a lovely tool for two sorts of users - those who are using free software (ie. Linux et al) and those who care not for license limitations.
for the real world, trying to stay (or even get!) legal, it is just another tool to make it easier for end users to become more non-compliant quicker.
just a couple days ago I had a developer come to me all excited about the idea of using VMware on his workstation. He had the idea that with a virtual workstation, he could avoid administrative restrictions in effect on his station and install whatever he wanted in the virtual environment, licensed or not didn't matter.
Technically, seems like a reasonable idea.. do whatever you want, screw up the virtual machine, then revert it later, no problem..
Legally.. you need a second license for almost every thing you install in that virtual environment, including the virtual Windows! well it's suddenly not so cheap.. for the cost of a full license of Windows, plus the VMware, you could buy a cheap computer with OEM windows, which would perform MUCH better then VMware on it's best day.
for the real world, trying to stay (or even get!) legal, it is just another tool to make it easier for end users to become more non-compliant quicker.
just a couple days ago I had a developer come to me all excited about the idea of using VMware on his workstation. He had the idea that with a virtual workstation, he could avoid administrative restrictions in effect on his station and install whatever he wanted in the virtual environment, licensed or not didn't matter.
Technically, seems like a reasonable idea.. do whatever you want, screw up the virtual machine, then revert it later, no problem..
Legally.. you need a second license for almost every thing you install in that virtual environment, including the virtual Windows! well it's suddenly not so cheap.. for the cost of a full license of Windows, plus the VMware, you could buy a cheap computer with OEM windows, which would perform MUCH better then VMware on it's best day.
We took the simpler route of buy MSDN licenses for every developer, every QA person and all our our support people. This way we can have a common set of tools that all of the users have access to, and the licensing problems associated with cloning images and running multiple copies of the OS (not to mention visual studio) are eliminated.
An MSDN licence allows you one permanent copy of the OS and one permanent copy of Office 2003, but you can use many images for development and testing. Most of our work here is using Microsoft's Virtual PC or Virtual Server.
As for Virtualization in a production situation, we have a fairly large datacenter, but as we've grown, rack space seems to shrink. Using the hardware based VMWare solution, we can combine a number of dev environment servers onto a single server.
Licensing here is moot. We'd have to have the licenses in any case. But we save big time on hardware. In most cases, these development and test servers (which are mostly app servers, web servers and SQL servers) are not heavily loaded in comparison to our production machines. So instead of 7 or 8 individual servers, we buy a single Dell 6850 with 16 GB ram, and run a number of virtual servers in the space of a single production box. Less cooling needed (we've got over one hundred rack mounted servers in there), a lot cheaper, and it's like building a new datacenter for free.
Regards,
Mike
An MSDN licence allows you one permanent copy of the OS and one permanent copy of Office 2003, but you can use many images for development and testing. Most of our work here is using Microsoft's Virtual PC or Virtual Server.
As for Virtualization in a production situation, we have a fairly large datacenter, but as we've grown, rack space seems to shrink. Using the hardware based VMWare solution, we can combine a number of dev environment servers onto a single server.
Licensing here is moot. We'd have to have the licenses in any case. But we save big time on hardware. In most cases, these development and test servers (which are mostly app servers, web servers and SQL servers) are not heavily loaded in comparison to our production machines. So instead of 7 or 8 individual servers, we buy a single Dell 6850 with 16 GB ram, and run a number of virtual servers in the space of a single production box. Less cooling needed (we've got over one hundred rack mounted servers in there), a lot cheaper, and it's like building a new datacenter for free.
Regards,
Mike
Microsoft is starting to embrace the virtualization trend and has adapted its licensing model to accommodate the cost-benefit hopeful:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensingr2/overview.mspx
It's not as expensive as you might think to run four Windows 2003 Server VM's on one box...
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/howtobuy/licensingr2/overview.mspx
It's not as expensive as you might think to run four Windows 2003 Server VM's on one box...
Virtualization seems like a lovely tool for two sorts of users - those who are using free software (ie. Linux et al) and those who care not for license limitations.
for the real world, trying to stay (or even get!) legal, it is just another tool to make it easier for end users to become more non-compliant quicker.
just a couple days ago I had a developer come to me all excited about the idea of using VMware on his workstation. He had the idea that with a virtual workstation, he could avoid administrative restrictions in effect on his station and install whatever he wanted in the virtual environment, licensed or not didn't matter.
Technically, seems like a reasonable idea.. do whatever you want, screw up the virtual machine, then revert it later, no problem..
Legally.. you need a second license for almost every thing you install in that virtual environment, including the virtual Windows! well it's suddenly not so cheap.. for the cost of a full license of Windows, plus the VMware, you could buy a cheap computer with OEM windows, which would perform MUCH better then VMware on it's best day.
for the real world, trying to stay (or even get!) legal, it is just another tool to make it easier for end users to become more non-compliant quicker.
just a couple days ago I had a developer come to me all excited about the idea of using VMware on his workstation. He had the idea that with a virtual workstation, he could avoid administrative restrictions in effect on his station and install whatever he wanted in the virtual environment, licensed or not didn't matter.
Technically, seems like a reasonable idea.. do whatever you want, screw up the virtual machine, then revert it later, no problem..
Legally.. you need a second license for almost every thing you install in that virtual environment, including the virtual Windows! well it's suddenly not so cheap.. for the cost of a full license of Windows, plus the VMware, you could buy a cheap computer with OEM windows, which would perform MUCH better then VMware on it's best day.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
