Virtualization: Best Windows based (Virtualbox, VMWare, etc).

RimBlock

RimBlock

RimBlock

Associate
Joined
10 Nov 2004
Posts
2,237
Location
Expat in Singapore
Hi,

I am looking to turn my NAS in to a virtulization server.

Seems like I need to have the base OS as Windows something (7 HP/Pro) as there is a bug in the current Linux Kernels that affects my hardware and kills the irq for my network card (Bug). Shame as I have a it more experience of running OpenVM / Proxmox / KVM.

I am planning to run virtulized;
WHS2011 (NAS).
DHCP (possibly in the WHS2011 virtulization or as a standalone 'appliance').
WHS2011 (WSUS - Windows update server to get all the updates and make them available for my 3 PCs).
Linux (CentOS probably - Minecraft Server, or two or three).

WHS NAS and WSUS separate as WSUS adds lots of network shares I do not seem to be able to hide from the media players. DHCP can go on either of the WHS2011 installs or as a 'appliance'. Minecraft on Linux which will be the main resource hog I would imagine.

One reason for doing this is that WHS2011 is limited to using only 8GB of ram and I have 12GB installed and can go up to 16GB quite easily.

So;
1. what is the best Windows based virtulization software which is free and likely to perform well ?
2. What is the best Win7 version to install it on (not going to stretch to WS2008r2 for a home setup).

Many thanks
RB
 
I hated Virtualbox and thought it was utter crap. Its installed virtual NIC drivers totally buggered up my workstation, and so many of its crappy components refused to uninstall, so I was left with remnants and phantom virtual adapters causing me to require a fresh install of Windows.

Was NOT happy. VMware worked flawlessly on the other hand.

VMware all the way, no question. I think people use virtualbox in the same way that some people use weird and crappy versions of Linux instead of Windows. They like to be "cool" and different to the norm.

They perhaps might be autistic also, possibly in conjunction with being socially phobic.

Most VMware users I have met however, have been quite normal.

:)
 
Dr. Pain said:
I hated Virtualbox and thought it was utter crap. Its installed virtual NIC drivers totally buggered up my workstation, and so many of its crappy components refused to uninstall, so I was left with remnants and phantom virtual adapters causing me to require a fresh install of Windows.

Was NOT happy. VMware worked flawlessly on the other hand.

VMware all the way, no question. I think people use virtualbox in the same way that some people use weird and crappy versions of Linux instead of Windows. They like to be "cool" and different to the norm.

They perhaps might be autistic also, possibly in conjunction with being socially phobic.

Most VMware users I have met however, have been quite normal.

:)
Click to expand...

Don't listen to this, it lacks any merit. Oracle Virtual Box, MS Virtual Pc & Vmware Workstation (plus others) all pretty much suffer the same issues. This is largely out of the box they are not designed to run as a service for supporting always on servers. They are more designed to bring on a LAB and for it to be powered down.

These desktop solutions you can publish them as customised "services" but it's all somewhat messy. Reboots etc... all become a bit of a pain and you become reliant on the console session and loose some flexibility.

I've not had an issue with any of them myself. Workstation is possibly the best out the bunch largely for it being so quick at deploying new instances and its wide support of guest OS.

Virtual PC is only really suited for MS products and lacks features.

Virtual Box is a bit of a halfway house. Its better than VPC and I use it a lot as its free. If I had spare cash all the time I would buy workstation, but then money is always a key point.

It sounds like you want to forget these desktop / lab options and go for a server solution.

To me, it sounds like you should use either

http://www.vmware.com/products/server/overview.html

or

http://www.microsoft.com/hyper-v-server/en/us/default.aspx

Both are free, if feeling brave then go ESXi but without virtual centers and other supporting kit its not brilliant for Labs but is the best pure hypervisor.
 
I've used a mixture of different products - VirtualBox atm seems pretty good but VMware offerings are probably the most mature. That said, with any desktop virtualisation product, it always feels a little slower to use compared with a bare metal hypervisor.

Version of Win 7? I think you'd have to go 64 bit to overcome the 32 bit memory limits.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(v=vs.85).aspx#physical_memory_limits_windows_7

VMware do have a couple of offerings - Workstation or Player. Feature comparison here:
http://vmfaq.com/entry/5/
 
bods said:
Version of Win 7? I think you'd have to go 64 bit to overcome the 32 bit memory limits.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa366778(v=vs.85).aspx#physical_memory_limits_windows_7
Click to expand...

Yeah, sorry, it was more a question of whether any Win7 version would be better than any other for this application (running a VM suite) or if I may as well stick to Win7 Home Premium. Would like WS2008r2 but seriously, 800+ USD for a home install is well over the top for what I want. It is a real shame that WHS is limited to the 8GB or that would have been ok. Of course if my Linux Hardware issue gets sorted then CentOS etc would be much more resource friendly.

Thanks
RB
 
Dr. Pain said:
...VMware all the way, no question. I think people use virtualbox in the same way that some people use weird and crappy versions of Linux instead of Windows. They like to be "cool" and different to the norm.

They perhaps might be autistic also, possibly in conjunction with being socially phobic.
Click to expand...

Thanks you DR Pain, that brought a smile to my face :D

Dr. Pain said:
Most VMware users I have met however, have been quite normal.

:)
Click to expand...

Of course I would presume you are using yourself as a benchmark for normal ;).

RB
 
ecksmen said:
To me, it sounds like you should use either

http://www.vmware.com/products/server/overview.html

or

http://www.microsoft.com/hyper-v-server/en/us/default.aspx

Both are free, if feeling brave then go ESXi but without virtual centers and other supporting kit its not brilliant for Labs but is the best pure hypervisor.
Click to expand...

Fantastic, either of those look like exactly what I need. Do you know of any comparisons between the two (yes I am also going to google :)) ?. Bit concerned that on the VM comparison link it mentions VM server was announced EOL in Jan 2010...

Would like to know which has the biggest footprint on the server between Vm server and MS Hyper-V. I think I recall playing with ESXi when I was looking at virtulization a year or so back and just didn't get my head round it but then I didn't spend too much time on it.

Cheers
RB
 
Install a copy of a VMware ESXi hypervisor and run all your VM's from there. No requirement for a host OS at all which you seem to be asking with your Win7 question.

ESXi 4.1 is free for use without virtual centre or any of the advanced features and has the smallest footprint. I have it installed on a memory stick which the box boots from allowing access to all internal disk space as datastores. ESX Server has been announced as EOL as they are moving to a single model with ESXi.

VMware 5 is due soon but 4.1 is more than good enough for a home install.
 
ShadowMan said:
Install a copy of a VMware ESXi hypervisor and run all your VM's from there. No requirement for a host OS at all which you seem to be asking with your Win7 question.

ESXi 4.1 is free for use without virtual centre or any of the advanced features and has the smallest footprint. I have it installed on a memory stick which the box boots from allowing access to all internal disk space as datastores. ESX Server has been announced as EOL as they are moving to a single model with ESXi.

VMware 5 is due soon but 4.1 is more than good enough for a home install.
Click to expand...

Yep, def looking for a virtulization OS type arrangement if possible. What is ESXi running off of under the skin. I read that ESX is(/was) using RHEL (Red Hat). If this is the case then the Linux kernel issue will most likely prevent me from using it. I know Win Server 2008r2 doesn't have a problem.

RB
 
ESXi is a bare metal hypervisor and it does not have the Redhat based service console that ESX has. Fairly limited console access but perfect for a home lab set up.

Once you install it, admin and configuration is performed via web browser or the client software.

Given the discontinuation of ESX, people will have to migrate to ESXi moving forward anyway.
 
bods said:
ESXi is a bare metal hypervisor and it does not have the Redhat based service console that ESX has. Fairly limited console access but perfect for a home lab set up.

Once you install it, admin and configuration is performed via web browser or the client software.

Given the discontinuation of ESX, people will have to migrate to ESXi moving forward anyway.
Click to expand...

Sure but as I understand it, just like MS Hyper-V is build on top of WS2008r@ but has not access to the underlying OS directly, surely ESXi is sitting on top of something else that you also cannot directly access. Like a lot of stuff these days where companies take a base Linux model and build and appliance on top and then removes the ability to access the OS environment beneath. The only other alternative is that VMWare have built their own kernel and drives for the vast array of hardware out there they envision wanting to have ESXi run on.

RB
 
Ok, the Wikipedia entry states they have developed their own kernel.

I will now go and take a look for the compatibility list as my machine is not server hardware, for the most part, and so I need to check there is a possibility it will work with what I have.

RB
 
bods said:
Something else to consider maybe is that cheap HP Server runs ESXi if you have the pennies....
Click to expand...

:D.

This server had taken me 6 months and far more money than it should have to get to this stage. Server has 20 external drive bays and another 3 internal. Getting two 8 port Sata cards to work on a single MB on a budget and finding out that my 5 WD Green drives really don't like being in a raid 5 array, to the point of having to RMA all 5 for excessive bad sectors), it is almost like a masochists dream now. I can't give up now or all the previous pain would have been for nothing ;).

TBH the HP server came out a month or so after I started with this and I probably would have got my folks to get one or two and ship them over to me after getting the rebate.

RB
 
RimBlock said:
:D.

This server had taken me 6 months and far more money than it should have to get to this stage. Server has 20 external drive bays and another 3 internal. Getting two 8 port Sata cards to work on a single MB on a budget and finding out that my 5 WD Green drives really don't like being in a raid 5 array, to the point of having to RMA all 5 for excessive bad sectors), it is almost like a masochists dream now. I can't give up now or all the previous pain would have been for nothing ;).

RB
Click to expand...

Now that's a project! A bit bigger than the homelab I was thinking about ;)
 
bods said:
ESXi is a bare metal hypervisor and it does not have the Redhat based service console that ESX has. Fairly limited console access but perfect for a home lab set up.

Once you install it, admin and configuration is performed via web browser or the client software.

Given the discontinuation of ESX, people will have to migrate to ESXi moving forward anyway.
Click to expand...

Er............

That makes no difference at all. You access ESXi either via Putty SSH and have total OS control, OR you can execute the same console commands if you have the VSphere CLI package installed on the machine you are accessing ESXi from.
 
There is a difference. Agents that take advantage of certain characteristics of the service console will not run on ESXi - that's one of the reasons you'll find monitoring and backup agents that work with ESX are not always capable of running on ESXi.
 
I have just installed ESXi and have spent the last 30 minutes trying to find out how to remotely administer it until I finally pointed the web browser there and found the link for the remote management client :(.

Looks very Linux like :D.

Just waiting for the client to finish downloading.

RB
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom