New build, 8 core opteron, quite a few drives planned - Vista x64 or Server 2k8?

sabregen

sabregen

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
19,501
I'll keep this simple. I have a build that's slowly coming together (it's up and running, but I'm still missing a few pieces), and was wondering what everyone's thoughts were on running a workstation that's going to have the following config:

ASUS KFN32-D SLI server board
2x Opteron HE8346 CPUs (Quad core 1.8's)
4x2GB Kingston PC2-5300 DDR2 ECC Reg (plan to go to 16GB shortly)
1x 74GB 2.5" SAS 10k boot (plans to go to 4 drive RAID-0 boot)
Plans to have 4x 2.5" 10k SAS "Scratch space" array
LSI 1068E PCI-E SAS controller
Onboard NvRAID 6port controller
6x WD 320AAKS in RAID-5 for data storage
Lite-On DVD burner
8800GTX 768MB
lower end 8xxx or 9xxx card for Physx
Emulex Lightpath 4Gb PCI-X FC HBA
About 500GB of FC attached storage for scratch space
Click to expand...

I plan to run the following:

OS (undecided on VIsta x64 or Server 2k8 in "workstation mode")
VMWare Workstation (running at least 6 VMs)
Transcoding applications for HD content
MyMovies database content to serve HTPC downstairs running Vista
Any other general purpose applciations
Going to test Windows Home server as VM (got 3 free 120day trials from MS)
Click to expand...

The real rub with that I don't know what OS to choose. I have been using Vista x64 for about a year and a half. I have had no issues with it, and like it very much. However, the inclusion of Hyper-V into Windows Server 2k8, and the way that 2k8 can grow/shrink storage volumes is intruiging. If I can run Server 2k8 in "workstation mode" and turn on services that are normally disabled, disable things I don't need, maintain Vista x64 driver compatibility, still play games, and use my apps...I think I'd like to head in that direction. Plus, it's a new OS for a new toy, and that, in and of itself, is enticing, for many reasons (shiny thing syndrome).

Who has real hands on time with both OS's, and who can help me with my quest on determining which would work better. Vista x64 for me, is tried and true, and I'd hate to shoot myself in the foot with Server 2k8, and have to reload again. Any help is appreciated. Thanks in advance.
 
Hyper-V probably won't play nice with your 8800GTX, but, as long as you're not using it, I'd go Server 2k8 if you have the OS. I run 2k8 Enterprise on my Dual Quad.
 
Sabregren,

The T7400 in my sig below runs 8 VM's under Vista Business 64 without even breaking a sweat. I'd agree with the above, try Win2k8 and see if it's what you want. However I'd say that Vista 64 will be more than fine for whatever you want to do. I don't see any convincing reasons that you list, other than 'ooo shiny' stuff that would sway you toward Server 2008 over Vista 64. The only thing that stood out as a 'gotcha' was the Emulex card, but lo and behold they have a Vista driver for it.
 
thanks for all the responses. I am curious regarding the mention of Hyper-V not playing nice with the 8800GTX, as I don't plan on trying to give any VM's access to the card. The inclusion of Hyper-V would be for comaprison against VMWare, as I am scheduled to take my VCP on the 12th of next month, and I am resident VMWare guru now at work. However, in that role, I also need to know the respective strengths of Xen and Hyper-V, as well.

ScretHate - I have an MSDN membership, and ActionPack membership, so I will not need the free trial, but thank you.

QHalo - I agree, there's not much reason to really run Server 2k8, other than to play with it. Any AD/DNS/DHCP/RAS/TS stuff that I plan to do, I would implement in a VM anyways, so that I can just use the installed OS as a workstation environment. No need to clutter the field.
 
sabregen said:
thanks for all the responses. I am curious regarding the mention of Hyper-V not playing nice with the 8800GTX, as I don't plan on trying to give any VM's access to the card. The inclusion of Hyper-V would be for comaprison against VMWare, as I am scheduled to take my VCP on the 12th of next month, and I am resident VMWare guru now at work. However, in that role, I also need to know the respective strengths of Xen and Hyper-V, as well.
Click to expand...

The main issue seems to stem from your base 2008 OS becoming a virtual machine. The hypervisor takes full control of all the hardware resources, just like an ESX install. So far, the accelerated video drivers have some choppyness issues, people report it's worse with nVidia hardware then ATI, but neither of them work quite right.

Here's a workaround using the XP x64 drivers, but you lose aero.

http://dizwell.com/2008/09/30/hyper-v-revisited/
 
Let me preempt the following with this statement, since it is obviously a response relating to ND40oz's post - I am not attempting to belittle you, or pass judgement. I am merely trying to set the record straight for those that are not knowledgeable about virtualization technologies. Misinformation causes confusion.

Hyper-v is a desktop virtualization solution (that just happens to be included with a server OS), and not a bare metal hypervisor installation like ESX (or Xen) is, so no...it doesn't have direct access to the hardware in the host machine (this is still controlled by the Host OS, and it's drivers). Also, I do not plan on virtualizing my host OS...I plan to run VMs inside of the host OS using either VMWare workstation, or Hyper-V. The term hypervisor itself refers to a bare metal virtualization platform (wikipedia definition: "A Type 1 (or native, bare-metal) hypervisor is software that runs directly on a given hardware platform (as an operating system control program). A guest operating system thus runs at the second level above the hardware.", which describes neither Hyper-V nor Workstation...so I am confused as to your references, in regards to the OS taking control of the video card, and other system resources. These things only happen when you are truly running a baremetal hypervisor, and in that instance, you basically wither get a service console, or a window telling you where to go to manage the system (via IP management through a web interface).

While all of your assumptions would be true if Hyper-V was indeed a hypervisor, and not a desktop virtualization system (which merely means that is requires an underlying Host OS. It does not mean that it is limited to virtualizing only dekstop OS's, which is not the case) that requires (in this case) Windows Server 2008 as the host OS, this is not the case with Hyper-V. I think perhaps you are either confusing the product line, the features, of the nomenclature, but I'm not sure where the disconnect is.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2008/en/us/hyperv-overview.aspx

"Windows Server 2008 Hyper-V, the next-generation hypervisor-based server virtualization technology, is available as an integral feature of Windows Server 2008 and enables you to implement server virtualization with ease."
Click to expand...

"hypervisor-based" is the same as saying that margarine is "butter-based," which is to say: DOES NOT INCLUDE BUTTER.
 
sorry but unless you're going to be hosting more than 10 incoming connections and or need to be a terminal server and or need to function as a domain controller - don't waste your time. From reading your sig you have a nice esx box already. If you didn't play any games it might be different, but I say stick with your Vista x64. Not all games are going to work on 2008
 
Vista x64 SP1 = Server 2008 down to the kernal - same OS really, except what you can add and do with server.
 
As Mrguv pointed out Vista SP1 and Server2008 have the same kernel.
 
I recently bench marked Server 2008 x64 (in 'Workstation mode') vs Vista SP1 x64, on the exact same hardware, and they are almost identical.

Crysis gained 1FPS across all benchmarks. Then another .5 FPS when all services were disabled
Vegas 2 gained around 1 average FPS and 10 to the maximum FPS. I did not bench this with disabled services but expected another 1 FPS gain to the average.

These results are not worth spending 800 for an OS or even having to deal with compatibility and configuration issues.

It was nice having a 12GB installation though, but that was also because there is no System Restore in Server 2008.
 
sabregen said:
Let me preempt the following with this statement, since it is obviously a response relating to ND40oz's post - I am not attempting to belittle you, or pass judgement. I am merely trying to set the record straight for those that are not knowledgeable about virtualization technologies. Misinformation causes confusion.

Hyper-v is a desktop virtualization solution (that just happens to be included with a server OS), and not a bare metal hypervisor installation like ESX (or Xen) is, so no...it doesn't have direct access to the hardware in the host machine (this is still controlled by the Host OS, and it's drivers). Also, I do not plan on virtualizing my host OS...I plan to run VMs inside of the host OS using either VMWare workstation, or Hyper-V. The term hypervisor itself refers to a bare metal virtualization platform (wikipedia definition: "A Type 1 (or native, bare-metal) hypervisor is software that runs directly on a given hardware platform (as an operating system control program). A guest operating system thus runs at the second level above the hardware.", which describes neither Hyper-V nor Workstation...so I am confused as to your references, in regards to the OS taking control of the video card, and other system resources. These things only happen when you are truly running a baremetal hypervisor, and in that instance, you basically wither get a service console, or a window telling you where to go to manage the system (via IP management through a web interface).

While all of your assumptions would be true if Hyper-V was indeed a hypervisor, and not a desktop virtualization system (which merely means that is requires an underlying Host OS. It does not mean that it is limited to virtualizing only dekstop OS's, which is not the case) that requires (in this case) Windows Server 2008 as the host OS, this is not the case with Hyper-V. I think perhaps you are either confusing the product line, the features, of the nomenclature, but I'm not sure where the disconnect is.



"hypervisor-based" is the same as saying that margarine is "butter-based," which is to say: DOES NOT INCLUDE BUTTER.
Click to expand...

Read this article from the March MSDN Magazine, the Hypervisor runs at ring minus 1, which gives it direct hardware access.

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc194386.aspx

Machine Virtualization
Prior to Windows Server 2008, Microsoft virtualization products, including Virtual Server 2005, have been implemented using hosted virtualization, as shown in Figure 5. In hosted virtualization, virtual machines are implemented by a Virtual Machine Monitor (VMM) that runs alongside a host operating system, typically as a device driver. The VMM relies on the host operating system's resource management and device drivers, and when the host operating system schedules it to execute, it time-slices the CPU among active virtual machines (VMs).

Figure 5 Hosted machine virtualization (Click the image for a larger view)
Hyper-V, previously code-named "Viridian," is implemented using hypervisor virtualization. The hypervisor is in full control of all hardware resources, and even the Windows Server 2008 operating system that boots the system and through which you control VMs is essentially running in a virtual machine, as seen in Figure 6.

Figure 6 Hyper-V architecture
The hypervisor can partition the system into multiple VMs and treats the booting instance of Windows Server 2008 as the master, or root, partition, allowing it direct access to hardware devices such as the disk, networking adapters, and graphics processor. The hypervisor expects the root to perform power management and respond to hardware plug and play events. It intercepts hardware device I/O initiated in a child partition and routes it into the root, which uses standard Windows Server 2008 device drivers to perform hardware access. In this way, servers running Hyper-V can take full advantage of Windows support for hardware devices.
When you configure Windows Server 2008 with the Hyper-V server role, Windows sets the hypervisorimagelaunchtypeboot Boot Configuration Database (BCD) setting to auto and configures the Hvboot.sys device driver to start early in the boot process. If the option is configured, Hvboot.sys prepares the system for virtualization and then loads either %Systemroot%\System32\Hvax64.exe or %Systemroot%\System32\Hvix64.exe into memory, depending on whether the system implements AMD-V or Intel VT CPU virtualization extensions, respectively.
Once loaded, the hypervisor uses the virtualization extensions to insert itself underneath Windows Server 2008. User-mode applications use the x64 processor's Ring 3 privilege level and kernel-mode code runs at Ring 0, so the hypervisor operates at conceptual privilege level Ring minus 1, since it can control the execution environment of code running in Ring 0.
When you use the Hyper-V management console to create or start a child partition, it communicates with the hypervisor using the %Systemroot%\System32\Drivers\Winhv.sys driver, which uses the publicly documented hypercall API to direct the hypervisor to create a new partition of specified physical-memory size and execution characteristics. The VM Service (%Systemroot%\System32\Vmms.exe) within the root is what creates a VM Worker Process (%Systemroot%\System32\Vmwp.exe) for each child partition to manage the state of the child.
One way Windows improves the performance of child VM operating systems is that both Windows Server 2008 and Windows Vista implement enlightenments, which are code sequences that activate only when the operating system is running on a hypervisor that implements the Microsoft hypercall API. By directly requesting services of the hypervisor, the child VM avoids virtualization code overhead that would result if the hypervisor had to guess the intent of the child operating system.
For example, a guest operating system that does not implement enlightenments for spinlocks, which execute low-level multiprocessor synchronization, would simply spin in a tight loop waiting for a spinlock to be released by another virtual processor. The spinning might tie up one of the hardware CPUs until the hypervisor scheduled the second virtual processor. On enlightened operating systems, the spinlock code notifies the hypervisor via a hypercall when it would otherwise spin so that the hypervisor can immediately schedule another virtual processor and reduce wasted CPU usage.
Another way Windows Server 2008 improves VM performance is to accelerate VM access to devices. Performance is enhanced by installing a collection of components, collectively called the "VM integration components," into the child operating system.
If you run a VM without installing integration components, the child operating system configures hardware device drivers for the emulated devices that hypervisor presents to it. The hypervisor must intervene when a device driver tries to touch a hardware resource in order to inform the Root partition, which performs device I/O using standard Windows device drivers on behalf of the child VM's operating system. Since a single high-level I/O operation, such as a read from a disk, may involve many discrete hardware accesses, it can cause many transitions, called intercepts, into the hypervisor and the root partition.
Windows Server 2008 minimizes intercepts with three components: the Virtual Machine Bus Driver (%Systemroot%\System32\Drivers\Vmbus.sys), Virtual Service Clients (VSCs), and Virtual Service Providers (VSPs). When you install integration components into a VM with a supported operating system, VSCs take over the role of device drivers and use the services of the Vmbus.sys driver in the child VM to send high-level I/O requests to the Virtual Machine Bus Driver in the Root partition via the hypercall and memory-sharing services of the hypervisor. In the root partition, Vmbus.sys forwards the request to the corresponding VSP, which then initiates standard Windows I/O requests via the root's device drivers.
Click to expand...

And here's the pic from the article:

cc194386_fig06en-us.gif
 
Well, this is certainly very interesting. I am big enough man to admit when I am wrong, and it would appear that this certainly is the case. I'm going to give our Channel program manager shit for not relaying this information to our company sooner.

This makes Server 2k8 even more appealing to me, really. To all of you that are comparing game benches between Vista x64 and Server 2k8 x64, that really isn't my only concern. Virtualization is a large part, and 1FPS difference, either way, is within the margin of error...and is not nothing to even bother mentioning for comparisons sake.

Hrmm....I may have to virtualize server 2k8 to see what I tihnk of the interface, and then go V2P with it, if I like it. Thanks ND40, good stuff there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top