An Introduction to Virtualization
by Liz van Dijk on October 28, 2008 2:00 AM EST- Posted in
- IT Computing
When Should We User Containers?
Considering their limitation to a single kernel, containers are not an ideal solution for pure server consolidation. It might be well deployed in an environment that requires a very large number of similar servers consolidated onto a single platform, but we find that this is often not the case. However, what containers are ideal for is the rapid deployment of large amounts of accessible "servers" - i.e. for seminars or classrooms. Hosting companies have been employing this technology for years, providing their customers with fully functional and customizable "private servers", and the relatively low resource footprints of containers allow the system to be used on servers and workstations alike.
An interesting example of this is what we encountered in our very own lab recently. From time to time, we are asked to perform stress tests on existing web applications, using our in-house developed software, vApus. Quite often, these web servers are already serving people, so it is impossible for us to request our clients to change their system layout to best suit our testing. One particular client required us to test from several IP addresses at the same time, since he had a Network Load Balancing system in place to redirect every request coming from a certain IP to one and the same web server, while there were six web servers present. Instead of going out of our way to set up six separate systems, we simply got a very powerful testing client set up with containers, and used six of them to perform the necessary tests.
While we wouldn't recommend containers as the best solution for actual server consolidation, we are definitely excited about its ability to transparently divide an OS to serve a very large number of isolated virtual environments. Furthermore, it is our opinion that containers are an incredible solution for Virtual Desktop Infrastructures, considering their more than adequate usability and high deployment rates. Given a little more development time, we are convinced that containers will find a solid place in server rooms, sporting many impressive features that will make the virtualized platform as a whole even more interesting.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
14 Comments
View All Comments
Ralphik - Wednesday, October 29, 2008 - link
Hello everybody,I have installed a virtual Win98 on my computer, which is running WinXP. The problem I have is that there are no GeForce7 and higher drivers available for such old Windows platforms - has anyone got a tip or a cracked driver that I could use? It now has a completely useless S3 Virge driver installed . . .
Jovec - Friday, October 31, 2008 - link
Unless I'm missing something (new), your Win98 running in your VM will not see your GeForce video card, or indeed any of the actual hardware in your computer. It just sees the virtual hardware provided by your VM software - typically an emulated basic VGA video adapter and AC'97 sound. VM software emulates an emulates an entire virtual computer on your host PC, but does not use the physical hardware natively.In short, you are not going to get Geforce level graphics power in your Win98 VM.
stmok - Wednesday, October 29, 2008 - link
"Could it be that these two pieces of software are using related techniques for their 3D acceleration? Stay tuned, as we will definitely be looking into this in further research!"=> Parallels took Wine's 3D acceleration component. More specifically, they took the translator that allowed one to translate OpenGL calls to DirectX and vice versa.
There was a minor issue about this when Parallels are not compliant with the open source license of Wine. But that was settled when Parallels complied with the LGPL two weeks later.
=> http://parallelsvirtualization.blogspot.com/2007/0...">http://parallelsvirtualization.blogspot...2007/07/...
=> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallels_Desktop_for...">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallels_Desktop_for...
What annoys me, is that they never bothered with adding 3D Acceleration support in the Linux version of Parallels. The only option is the very current release of VMware Workstation. (Version 6.5 has technology implemented from their VMware Fusion product).
duploxxx - Tuesday, October 28, 2008 - link
btw is this a teaser for the long announced virtualization performance review?Vidmo - Tuesday, October 28, 2008 - link
I was hoping this article would get into some of the latest hardware technologies designed for better virtualization. It's still quite confusing trying to determine which hardware platforms and CPUs support VT-d for example.The article is a nice software overview, but seems incomplete without getting into the hardware side of the issues.
solusstultus - Tuesday, October 28, 2008 - link
Hardware support for VT is not used by most/any? commercial hypervisors (VMware doesn't use it) and has been shown to actually have lower performance in many cases than binary translation:http://www.vmware.com/pdf/asplos235_adams.pdf">http://www.vmware.com/pdf/asplos235_adams.pdf
duploxxx - Tuesday, October 28, 2008 - link
unfortunately your link is 2 years old.Current statement for Vmware ESX is that you should use the hardware virtualization layer when you have 64bit OS at any time and when virtualization layer 2 aka NPT from amd (ept when intel launches nehalem next year) at any time.
solusstultus - Wednesday, October 29, 2008 - link
While I don't claim to be an expert, that's the most recent study that I have seen that actually lists performance results from both techniques.If you have seen more recent results, do you have a link? I would be interested in reading it.
From what I have seen, NPT addresses overheads associated with switching from the Guest to the VMM during page table updates (which can occur frequently when using small pages). However, the other main source of overhead cited in the paper that I referenced were traps into the VMMs on system calls which could be replaced by less expensive direct links to VMM routines in translated code. So unless the newer hardware support virtualization implementations address this (they might, I haven't looked at the documentation), it seems translation could still be potentially faster for some apps, and that an ideal implementation would make use of both in different situations.
Vidmo - Tuesday, October 28, 2008 - link
Ahh I somehow missed the link to your hardware article.http://it.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3263&...">http://it.anandtech.com/IT/showdoc.aspx?i=3263&...
Very well done. Would it be possible to update that article to reflect VT-d and possibly TV-i technologies as well?
LizVD - Tuesday, October 28, 2008 - link
Thanks for the input!The real purpose of this article was to provide a "beginner-safe" intro into the things we have been discussing on Anandtech IT for the past couple of months, so in-depth discussion of each of the technologies is something we avoided on purpose, to keep focus on the basic differences without getting carried away.
Your question is an interesting one, however, and of the sort we'd like to properly address in our blogs, so keep an eye on them, as we'll be looking into it.