On Jun 25, 8:28 pm, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> ____/ Rex Ballard on Monday 25 June 2007 19:54 : \____
>
>
>
> > On Jun 25, 11:06 am, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> >> IBM Previews Virtualization Management Tool for Power-Based Boxes
>
> >> ,----[ Quote ]
> >> | ...Virtual Availability Manager, within the Systems Director
> >> | Virtualization Manager tool will allow customers who deploy a Xen
> >> | hypervisor on their Linux-on-X64 servers to create what IBM is
> >> | calling a "high availability farm" that can be used to rehost
> >> | virtual machine partitions that are taken out by crashes.
> >> `----
> > The article is great, but the headline of this posting is misleading.
> > IBM has offered Linux for ALL platforms, including the I-Series, P-
> > Series, X-Series, and Z-Series since 1999. IBM has also offered Linux
> > within the LPARs of the I, P, and Z series, all of which have their
> > own hypervisor.
>
> > IBM licenses some of it's VM technology to VMWare. Keep in mind that
> > IBM has been doing VM since 1968, as a way to provide low-cost
> > development systems to companies who didn't want to buy dedicated
> > mainframes for each development project.
>
> > In the late 1990s, IBM streamlined VM for the Z-series, creating ZVM,
> > which was even more efficient and faster. The highly optimized
> > virtual machines have made it possible to run as many as 16 VMs per
> > processor on P-Series systems, and as many as 1000 VMs per processor
> > on Z series. One demonstration of Z series created 64,000 VMs, each
> > searching several other servers and serving several other VM clients.
> > Not a true "benchmark", but a good way to show some of the capability.
>
> >>http://www.itjungle.com/tfh/tfh062507-story07.html
>
> Thanks for pointing that out. I was aware that they have done this for a while,
> but this management tool appears to be new. The way I thought the subject line
> should be read it: *New* virtualisation management software helps bring Linux
> to more servers, with emphasis on "New". You know this stuff /way/ better than
> I do.
It looks like what's new is the graphical interface.
These days, most X-Series servers are configured with a very
lightweight Linux
that acts as the "management console" and organizes the other VMs.
This makes
it easier to deploy "appliance" versions of popular configurations and
relocate them
quickly within server farms. IBM has been working with VMWare for
several years,
and is now also supporting Xen.
Different flavors of the same concepts.
In the X-Series environments it's possible to mix and match Linux and
Windows servers within a blade array, or even within the same server
or blade.
Desktop Virtualization has been rapidly gaining popularity, and it's
quite likely that similar types of technology will be used by Lennovo,
Dell, HP, and Toshiba, possibly within the next 2-3 months. This is
one of the reasons Microsoft has been scrambling to cut deals with the
Linux vendors.
Linux is very good at "playing nice" with Windows, especially Windwos
2000 and Windows XP. It's very easy to take a PC with 1-2 gigabytes
and install both Linux and Windows running concurrently. You can put
the Windows console interface on one of the virtual desktops, and flip
between them easier than flipping between two computers sitting on the
same desk.
Because Linux can be told how big a VM can/should be, the OS can
quickly grant that much memory. Running VMs under Windows, especially
Windows XP or Vista is a big problem because the OS fights to keep all
of the memory for Windows. This makes the VMs MUCH slower. Microsoft
could fix this if they wanted to, but they were trying so hard to keep
Linux OFF the desktop, that Linux is now the preferred platform for
the HOST operating system instead of the GUEST.
The good news is that the Windows VM runs better under Linux than it
does on native hardware. Linux manages disk more efficiently, and
this is really important when Windows is going out to the hard drive
alot. I have a Windows VM on my Linux PC and it really runs great.
I've been using VMWare, but if IBM can come up with a really good
graphical interface to Xen that makes Xen as easy to use as VMWare,
I'll probably want to generate a Xen appliance too. VMWare and Xen
are working together to try and standardize some of the key components
of virtualization.
Microsoft started out trying to bully the VM vendors into giving
Microsoft control of the system as the primary OS, much as they did
with their other Virtualization offering. The VM vendors refused to
cave in completely, but the Microsoft interface to the VM does contain
patented software for interfacing to the Windows Operating System.
I'm not sure how "original" the patent are, one of the problems of not
being required to disclose all of the code when applying for a patent.
Microsoft also seems intent on preventing retail purchasers from
installing Linux and putting Vista on as a VM Client. It would seem
like this is yet another direct violation of the terms of the DOJ
settlement, but then again, Microsoft and law-breaking or judgement
defiance has become so tightly coupled they are almost synonymous.
I wonder how Microsoft would feel if the Linux community organized
massive attacks against Windows users, infesting their computers with
viruses that did serious damage and disabled their computers? The big
difference is that if IBM did that, Microsoft would be filing lawsuits
and demanding $billions in damages, or hiring some 3rd rate bit player
company to do it for them (SCO). When Microsoft gets caught red-
handed, the DOJ just says "Yeah, what's the problem". A bit like the
Red Neck sheriff who won't arrest the rich white boy who raped all
three of the Mexican fathers virgin daughters. Instead, the sheriff
takes their green cards or social security cards, puts the whole
family in Jail, and has INS deport them as illegal immigrants.
Not much difference here. Microsoft locks out at least 6 Linux
distributions, multimedia players, antivirus vendors, and search
engines, and the DOJ says "what's the problem", maybe we should ban
OSS software and all non-microsoft software so that you terrorists
won't be able to attack the system.
> ~~ Best of wishes
> Roy S. Schestowitz | Disclaimer: no SCO code used to generate this posthttp://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux |
|
|
