Virtualization Technology what a great feature

W

wdn

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 6, 2006
Messages
504
I am running Ubuntu Linux right now under VMWare server on XP Pro. Wow it is really excellent. I have a few things I need to figure out like how to get ubuntu to recognize my USB devices so it will see my printer but so far so good.

This is really excellent I can run Linux under Windows and it is fast. The performance is impressive I thought VT was this really obscure feature of the Conroe but it is turning out to be quite useful. I have run software emulators before, they are bog slow. But this VT is all done in hardware and very fast. The free VMWare server is a nice piece of work too.
 
Nice to hear, I was planning on doing the same. What mobo do you have and any driver problems or anything? I tried to get dual boot on my Asus P4P800 board and man does linux hate it :(
 
I am using a Gigabtype GA965P-DS3 motherboard. Check my sig for the equipment list. VMWare is already much nicer than a dual boot. you boot to XP just like a normal session. Then you run VMWare and it brings up a control panel that resembles a browser. The first time you say create a new virtual machine and tell it what kind (example: Ubuntu Linux). Then you put the bootable Ubuntu install disk in the CD drive. You push the start button and VMWare boots the machine ... it looks just like the boot sequence ... and it boots from the CD and lets you install the operating system. You have never left Windows mind you or really rebooted the machine. It is like a virtual reboot from inside the VMWare panel running inside XP.

After you install the OS the first time all you have to do is press the play button and it boots to Linux. The entire Linux desktop appears as a Window in XP. To switch out of the Linux window and back to XP all you need to do is press <ctrl><alt> keys. You can do this at any time even while the Linux virtual machine is booting. It had the printer driver for my Samsung laser printer. I just need to figure out how to assign it the USB printer so I can print documents from Linux. It will just take a little bit of research. I installed the device driver for my laser printer but it is not talking to it yet over the USB port. I am running from my Linux VM right now as I type this.
 
I figured out how to enable USB devices in VMware Server. You select the virtual machine when it is not running, and click on Edit Virtual Machine Settings.

Then you click on Add and it brings up a wizard that lets you add various types of hardware devices. Select USB controller. Then it adds a 2 port USB controller that is accessible from inside the guest OS (Ubuntu Edgy in this case). Next in the VMware server menu you click on VM --> Removable devices --> USB Devices and select the one you want. In this case it was "Samsung Electronics USB device (Port 1)". Next start up the virtual machine which boots up Ubuntu Linux.

Now all I need to do is hook up Ubuntu to use the USB. Go to System --> Administration --> Printing and select the Samsung printer which I already installed the device driver. Right click on it and bring up Properties --> Advanced --> Connection. Now click on the box marked Use A Detected Printer.

A few steps but now it is all set up and printing to my USB laser printer from Ubuntu guest operating system works like a champ now.
 
Dang... I'm gonna have to try that out.

Not that I have a E6XXX, let alone a C2D... but it'll be fun just to take a look. And it will make me want to upgrade from this P4, LOL.
 
william_fontaine said:
Dang... I'm gonna have to try that out.

Not that I have a E6XXX, let alone a C2D... but it'll be fun just to take a look. And it will make me want to upgrade from this P4, LOL.
Click to expand...

No, it will not. P4 doesn't support VT. It might work but it will be Dog Slow.
 
wdn said:
I am running Ubuntu Linux right now under VMWare server on XP Pro. Wow it is really excellent. I have a few things I need to figure out like how to get ubuntu to recognize my USB devices so it will see my printer but so far so good.

This is really excellent I can run Linux under Windows and it is fast. The performance is impressive I thought VT was this really obscure feature of the Conroe but it is turning out to be quite useful. I have run software emulators before, they are bog slow. But this VT is all done in hardware and very fast. The free VMWare server is a nice piece of work too.
Click to expand...


Nice going:)
 
Donnie27 said:
No, it will not. P4 doesn't support VT. It might work but it will be Dog Slow.
Click to expand...

I don't think you read my post right. I'm gonna try it on a P4, it will probably be dog slow, which will make me want to upgrade to the C2D that I don't have yet.
 
wdn said:
I am running Ubuntu Linux right now under VMWare server on XP Pro. Wow it is really excellent. I have a few things I need to figure out like how to get ubuntu to recognize my USB devices so it will see my printer but so far so good.

This is really excellent I can run Linux under Windows and it is fast. The performance is impressive I thought VT was this really obscure feature of the Conroe but it is turning out to be quite useful. I have run software emulators before, they are bog slow. But this VT is all done in hardware and very fast. The free VMWare server is a nice piece of work too.
Click to expand...

What will really blow your mind is that you can run an x64 OS as guest on a x86 host-OS and the CPU will run in "native" x64 mode for the guest. Now that freaks me out. However, I am under the impression that AMD has the same feature.
Donnie27 said:
No, it will not. P4 doesn't support VT. It might work but it will be Dog Slow.
Click to expand...

VMWare has been around quite a bit longer than VT. I have been running VMs on my A64 for a while (Workstation) and have little trouble with it.
 
The increase in speed you experience with VMWare is not due to VT.

Read the following from VMWare engineers: http://www.vmware.com/vmtn/resources/528

and

Read the following on the vmware forums: http://www.vmware.com/community/message.jspa?messageID=376400

VT will allow you to run a 64-bit guest OS in VMWare. It does not offer any performance improvements for 32-bit guests. In fact, it will slow them down. VMWare has publicly stated they will not modify their current releases to enable VT w/ 32-bit guests because it is SLOWER than their software solution.

Dual cores, along with the improved C2D architecture are the reasons you experience improved performance with VM guests.
 
jeenam said:
The increase in speed you experience with VMWare is not due to VT.

Read the following on the vmware forums: http://www.vmware.com/community/message.jspa?messageID=376400

VT will allow you to run a 64-bit guest OS in VMWare. It does not offer any performance improvements for 32-bit guests. In fact, it will slow them down. VMWare has publicly stated they will not modify their current releases to enable VT w/ 32-bit guests because it is SLOWER than their software solution.

Dual cores, along with the improved C2D architecture are the reasons you experience improved performance with VM guests.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the clarification... I was personnally worried about missing the VT advantages with the Allendale core but I guess I can be reassured since I don't plan to run 64 -bit OS in VMWare at all.
 
wdn I've got a question for you,

I have the same mobo, but I'm using Vista. I downloaded the VMware Server console, which I think is the right one....it was the only one with .exe, the rest were Linux files.

Anyways, when I start the Server console I see everything you stated above, but the Create New VM is greyed out and it just asks me to connect to a Host? Does this make sense? Am I running the wrong Server software?

Even better, if anyone knows a good source for me to read up on this I would love to. Been fiddling for days and VMware's KBs are crap.

Thanks!
 
Tahoe916 said:
wdn I've got a question for you,

I have the same mobo, but I'm using Vista. I downloaded the VMware Server console, which I think is the right one....it was the only one with .exe, the rest were Linux files.

Anyways, when I start the Server console I see everything you stated above, but the Create New VM is greyed out and it just asks me to connect to a Host? Does this make sense? Am I running the wrong Server software?

Even better, if anyone knows a good source for me to read up on this I would love to. Been fiddling for days and VMware's KBs are crap.

Thanks!
Click to expand...
have your registered (licensed) your copy?
 
Well thanks Jeenam I stand corrected.

32 bit VT or not the performance is good running Ubuntu under VMware.
 
drizzt81 said:
VMWare has been around quite a bit longer than VT. I have been running VMs on my A64 for a while (Workstation) and have little trouble with it.
Click to expand...

Dewd, please! I've seen several Xeons running VMware. Even Dual socket but single Core Athlons (ANY) and P4 based Xeons sucked at it, at least seemed to. P4s even with HT and sucks at it as well. That's why I never bothered with it. E6600 has me interested now.

http://www.intel.com/performance/server/xeon_mp/vt.htm
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_8796_8799,00.html?redir=SWAB01
 
Just to clarify-

The hardware virtualization technology that was alluded to earlier in this thread is not in play here, as has been generally accepted in the last few posts. VMWare is fully virtualizing the os, meaning that it is translating every command.

Hardware virtualization applies to another type of virtualization called paravirtualization, of which VMWare is battling Xen for supremacy. In paravirtualization (and this grossly simplifies things...) the system runs a thin hypervisor underneath the os that translates some commands but lets others directly through to the hardware, creating much faster access. The speed loss in paravirtualizing an os is around 5%, compared to 25% or so with the fully virtualized solutions. However, the base os kernel (not the virtualized one) needs to be modified to support paravirtualization, meaning it has to be rebuilt, unless the cpu supports hardware virtualization. In this case the cpu can run paravirtualized operating systems without modification to the base os.
 
I run VMWare on my laptop which has a Pentium M 1.6, and my desktop with a P4-C and it runs great. I don't think hardware virtualization technology is necessary for me.
 
Spaceman_Spiff said:
Just to clarify-

The hardware virtualization technology that was alluded to earlier in this thread is not in play here, as has been generally accepted in the last few posts. VMWare is fully virtualizing the os, meaning that it is translating every command.

Hardware virtualization applies to another type of virtualization called paravirtualization, of which VMWare is battling Xen for supremacy. In paravirtualization (and this grossly simplifies things...) the system runs a thin hypervisor underneath the os that translates some commands but lets others directly through to the hardware, creating much faster access. The speed loss in paravirtualizing an os is around 5%, compared to 25% or so with the fully virtualized solutions. However, the base os kernel (not the virtualized one) needs to be modified to support paravirtualization, meaning it has to be rebuilt, unless the cpu supports hardware virtualization. In this case the cpu can run paravirtualized operating systems without modification to the base os.
Click to expand...

SWEET!
 
jeenam said:
The increase in speed you experience with VMWare is not due to VT.

Read the following from VMWare engineers: http://www.vmware.com/vmtn/resources/528

and

Read the following on the vmware forums: http://www.vmware.com/community/message.jspa?messageID=376400

VT will allow you to run a 64-bit guest OS in VMWare. It does not offer any performance improvements for 32-bit guests. In fact, it will slow them down. VMWare has publicly stated they will not modify their current releases to enable VT w/ 32-bit guests because it is SLOWER than their software solution.

Dual cores, along with the improved C2D architecture are the reasons you experience improved performance with VM guests.
Click to expand...

Quoted for truth. VMware engineers know their own products best. All VT is good for is running 64-bit guest on a 32-bit host when you have a 64-bit CPU.

I have no trouble running a test Win2K3 Standard R2 x86 VM with SQL Server 2005 on any computer, including my dual P3 1GHz server. They run just as fast as if the OS was actually loaded on the computer. My only advice is don't enable virtual SMP.
 
MrMike said:
Quoted for truth. VMware engineers know their own products best. All VT is good for is running 64-bit guest on a 32-bit host when you have a 64-bit CPU.

I have no trouble running a test Win2K3 Standard R2 x86 VM with SQL Server 2005 on any computer, including my dual P3 1GHz server. They run just as fast as if the OS was actually loaded on the computer. My only advice is don't enable virtual SMP.
Click to expand...

I have also read on the VMware site that there is a competitor to VMware server that HAS implemented VT for 32 bit guest operating systems, and that it is much faster than without VT enabled (and much faster than VMware). So I think it is a limitation of VMware not a deficiency in the VT hardware. I am going to have to do a little market research to find out who this mystery competitor might be. But I think I will just stick with VMware server anyway because it is free.
 
MrMike said:
All VT is good for is running 64-bit guest on a 32-bit host when you have a 64-bit CPU.
Click to expand...

Not entirely true- maybe the biggest draw for vt technology, long term at least, is definitely paravirtualization, which vt hardware makes significantly easier to implement. I spent a couple months working on a research project involving Xen and the potential of it is absolutely insane.
 
um VT us great for running 2 OSs ?


i am doing OSX and XP on my macbook core 2 duo, but i dont think paralells properly, if at all, supports VT, as XP runs slow with some apps.......
 
Spaceman_Spiff said:
Not entirely true- maybe the biggest draw for vt technology, long term at least, is definitely paravirtualization, which vt hardware makes significantly easier to implement. I spent a couple months working on a research project involving Xen and the potential of it is absolutely insane.
Click to expand...

What he meant was that, on the VMware platform, VT is required to run 64bit guests on 32bit hosts.

I have been using VMware for 4 years now and I can tell you that VMware has done a great job in all facets of virtualization. This includes the easy management of the virtual machines.

For many like mysef, it is really about ease of management that makes virtualization appealing. Imagine being able to carry a whole network of clustered servers on your laptop and managing it with great ease.
 
I want to see some hard numbers supporting the fact that Xen only uses 5&#37; resources compared to others using up to 35%.

Until I see hard data confirming that it sounds like nothing but a marketing ploy.

And at the same time why the hell would you support 32 proc's, but only 16GB of ram? If anything it should be the other way around. On all of our prod ESX servers its a standard 4GB ram per proc. And most of them are 8way systems.



XenEnterprise is built to scale up to large deployments. It can handle up to 32 sockets and up to 16GB of RAM. Further, XenEnterprise can create and manage an unlimited number of virtual machines. Live migration and clustered SAN storage support will be added in Q2 of 2007.
Click to expand...

So you have to wait until Q2 2007 for them support features that VMware has had for a while. Namely HA & DRS.
 
I really have never had a use for Virtualizaton Technology. However I agree it is an outstanding feature and only has room to improve. While running a current Apple Computer with Core Duo or Core 2 Duo's the ability to run parrallels software and run "Windows" in a window on the OSX Desktop is quite amazing. I never thought I would see the day.
 
MrGuvernment said:
So how long until 2 people can use one system at the same time...
Click to expand...

err... remote desktop (Windows) and X session (Linux) allow that even without virtualization.

With virtualization, remote desktop/X session, VMware console, or VNC will allow you to do just that.
 
VMWare FTW!!

I personally love running Knoppix 5.1.1 under VMWare. It's way faster than when booting off of the CD because the ISO is on the HD. I still have to boot to Knoppix or DSL occasionally to do forensics, but for sheer application flexibility, it's lovely to just throw open a VMWare session, have Debian just sitting there, and then pop right back out and game without even needing to reboot.
 
acascianelli said:
I run VMWare on my laptop which has a Pentium M 1.6, and my desktop with a P4-C and it runs great. I don't think hardware virtualization technology is necessary for me.
Click to expand...

heh I'm hosting my server on my dothan 2.0 myself. It goes fine except for the inherent memory leaks in xp that makes me have to reboot around 3 weeks or so or else the computer is unusable.

I installed a x86 platform in vmware on my e6400 and didn't tell any noticable dramatic improvements other than from the faster chip. Guess now I know why.
 
Does anyone know if there is a non-negligible performance gap between VMware for Linux and Windows? I tried both on the same hardware before and felt like I was getting better response from the Linux version but I didn't run any benchmarks to confirm.
 
Met-AL said:
Huh? Can you clarify these "memory leaks" in xp?
Click to expand...

just from uptime, I suppose. After about 3 weeks or so, I'd be seeing like 2gb used, and the shit in processes just doesn't add up at all.
 
drizzt81 said:
What will really blow your mind is that you can run an x64 OS as guest on a x86 host-OS and the CPU will run in "native" x64 mode for the guest. Now that freaks me out. However, I am under the impression that AMD has the same feature.


VMWare has been around quite a bit longer than VT. I have been running VMs on my A64 for a while (Workstation) and have little trouble with it.
Click to expand...

AMD uses Pacifica instructions for virtualization in the AMD64 and X2's. I love VMWare.

And to Ziddey, you may have memory leaks from somewhere, but it isn't "inherent" to XP. I very rarely reboot. It's one thing to slam Microsoft for the crap that they do, but let's not crap on them for things that aren't their fault. I highly recommend you check your background processes and look into doing a defrag.
 
ziddey said:
just from uptime, I suppose. After about 3 weeks or so, I'd be seeing like 2gb used, and the shit in processes just doesn't add up at all.
Click to expand...

Oh, my bad, I thought you were saying XP was leaking memory, not the apps running on it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top