Boston Linux & Unix (BLU) Home | Calendar | Mail Lists | List Archives | Desktop SIG | Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings
Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Blog | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU

BLU Discuss list archive


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Migrating off Vmware-Server, but where to?



On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 11:03 AM, Rich Braun <richb-RBmg6HWzfGThzJAekONQAQ at public.gmane.org> wrote:

> Derek Atkins asked about migrating off VMware Server 2.0.  (I used that for
> a
> while last year).  Check out VirtualBox, as I noted earlier: it directly
> addresses at least 6 out of 8 questions posted, and it'd be easy to craft
> scripts and a wrapper page to address the first 2.
>
> Matthew Gillen asked for clarification about my benchmark comparing ext4
> vs.
> LVM storage:  I'd guess one minor performance penalty of ext4 is its
> blocksize
> (4K) vs. that of LVM (4M is default), but that can't be the full
> explanation
> for the substantial difference I saw (and that any of y'all should be able
> to
> observe).  When I create a vm, I always preallocate its storage, and yes,
> VirtualBox does support the alternative (growable).  I wouldn't know
> anything
> about ext3-compatbility mode; my ext4 volumes are generated under OpenSuse
> via
> 'mkfs -t ext4'.
>
> Alas I haven't tried KVM so I can't comment on the comparison with VMware
> Server (which sux and as noted is end-of-lifed), VMware ESXi (which is
> solid
> and high-performing but more of a full-time engineering job to administer,
> costs money, and doesn't provide a standalone UI), and VirtualBox.
>
> -rich
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss-mNDKBlG2WHs at public.gmane.org
> http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>

I find VirtualBox on all host platforms (Windows/Linux/Mac) good considering
it's free, but for bare metal VM I found that nothing beats VMware.  It's
just expensive as hell.

If you want to run VM's on Mac, Parallels I find is better than VirtualBox.
 It manages memory and cpu so much better.  Also some OS's, like windows it
will hide the desktop and make the app's appear as though they are native
Mac apps.  It also makes windows transparently map your home folder "My
Documents" to your Mac's home folder, so working between host and guest OS
easy.

-matt






BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities.

Valid HTML 4.01! Valid CSS!



Boston Linux & Unix / webmaster@blu.org