Products > Computers

Which Hypervisor

(1/4) > >>

blacksheeplogic:
I've found Virtual Box has been problematic especially after upgrades so I'm wanting to move away from it. Seems to be a very limited number of options.  I have the option of using Hyper-V with a Windows-Pro license but I'm leaning to wards VMWare Workstation Pro 16 as it's single user license is around AUD300. They offer 30 days free support and I've not looked into the piece of a yearly support/maintenance. Upgraded add up over time tho. Are there any others worth looking at that offer a single user license? I don't want to invest too heavily as  I don't plan on moving to Windows 11 so future systems will not run windows.

nightfire:
Depends what your priorities are.

At work, we also had some of this discussions lately- and as we are having developers needing to be able to attach some special measuring devices via USB/Serial to the VM, we finally settled to VMWare Workstation, as the Hyper-V inbuild desktop Virtualizator is working as a Type 1 virtualization a bit differently from Vmware, which is Type 2.

Experience with stability is good, we are doing some stuff with Embarcadero C++ there, so we have to use compiler and debugger inside the VM.

What are your exact requirements to which application software will be housed into a VM?

blacksheeplogic:

--- Quote from: nightfire on November 20, 2021, 10:01:06 pm ---What are your exact requirements to which application software will be housed into a VM?

--- End quote ---

I'm needing only a type 2 hypervisor at the moment. Mainly I only need to host my Linux build servers & development/test environments and a few basic services I prefer to keep separated (Git server, file servers, & firewall). I connect and mange everything via remote connections so I'm not concerned with the client hardware support. Most of my work is C and I move over to real hardware if I run into any issues. Very basic requirements but I need the VM's be be stable and easily recoverable and I want to have configured a large number but outside of the basic services I only have a handful of VM's running.

evb149:
There are different kinds of hypervisors.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypervisor
"...Type-1, native or bare-metal hypervisors"
"...Modern equivalents include AntsleOS,[5] Microsoft Hyper-V and Xbox One system software, Nutanix AHV, XCP-ng, Oracle VM Server for SPARC, Oracle VM Server for x86, POWER Hypervisor,[6] QNX Hypervisor,[7] VMware ESXi (formerly ESX), Proxmox Virtual Environment, Xen and Kernel-based Virtual Machine (KVM)."


"...Type-2 hypervisors abstract guest operating systems from the host operating system. Parallels Desktop for Mac, QEMU, VirtualBox, VMware Player and VMware Workstation are examples of type-2 hypervisors."

I wouldn't really consider hyper-v, and virtualbox to be altogether comparable because of the above mentioned distinctions.

If you just want to virtualize something running under an x86_64 native platform then your major options are those listed above.  If it is preferable | not objectionable to run a type 2 hypervisor under such a LINUX host and you want a x86_64 guest OS then KVM is a reasonable alternative to VirtualBox in many regards which I can commend.

A lot of people find Proxmox_Virtual_Environment to be convenient but I think Vmware Workstation is probably more used in commercial / enterprise types of scenarios for general virtualization on workstations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxmox_Virtual_Environment

Your workload will dictate what kinds of features you may want / need from a virtualization environment -- guest OS support, whether guest additions / drivers / paravirtualization or similar is available and functional for your guest OS and installation, whether GPU / 3d / 2d graphics acceleration or pass-through or whatever is available / useful / needed, what other kinds of host to guest hardware utilization / pass-through is available (USB vN.N controllers / devices, PCIE devices, storage controllers / channels / targets, ...).

In my own experience VirtualBox is convenient to use / "sysadmin" as an end user and generally works though has very limited guest 3d graphics / GPU capabilities, and limited guest USB / PCIE / storage exposure / pass-through also.  If your guests do not care much about such things then KVM (along with the UIs / machine management utilities supporting KVM based VMs your choice of LINUX desktop offers e.g. virt-manager etc.) seems like it may be a reasonable alternative, and, I suppose, Vmware Workstation as you said, are the two most direct alternatives to VB which should be comparable in most ways.

Wrt. support you can buy enterprise LINUX software and hardware platforms (e.g. RHEL, SLES, ...) which offer support and documentation etc. along with supported virtualization tools on top of base platform capabilities like KVM and Xen and I suppose the cost would be competitive with the Windows-Pro/Hyper-V option you mention.
https://www.suse.com/solutions/server-and-application-virtualization/


evb149:
For that use case, if you like LINUX, I'd personally certainly run a linux host like at least suse / ubuntu server, maybe centos or rhel.  Then KVM based virtualization and the distribution's best supported / applicable for your use case VM provisioning / management tools (e.g. stuff that works with libvirt, virt-manager, whatever).

Since you're wanting to have a lot of them provisioned and easily (wrt. an engineer's workflow) managed but have few actually running at once you might consider whether you want to use only the platform general CLI / UI tools to provision and sysadmin VMs or if you want to integrate that via some kinds of more general devops tools of your choice to setup and manage the guests e.g. vagrant, et. al.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vagrant_(software)

KVM based facilities have worked for me for those sorts of guest needs and then you're not at the mercy of oracle vbox. wrt. bugs and capabilities since you have more choices of deployments / versions / etc. with KVM that has been long stable and presently offered in most every variant of LINUX.


--- Quote from: blacksheeplogic on November 20, 2021, 10:31:21 pm ---
--- Quote from: nightfire on November 20, 2021, 10:01:06 pm ---What are your exact requirements to which application software will be housed into a VM?

--- End quote ---

I'm needing only a type 2 hypervisor at the moment. Mainly I only need to host my Linux build servers & development/test environments and a few basic services I prefer to keep separated (Git server, file servers, & firewall). I connect and mange everything via remote connections so I'm not concerned with the client hardware support. Most of my work is C and I move over to real hardware if I run into any issues. Very basic requirements but I need the VM's be be stable and easily recoverable and I want to have configured a large number but outside of the basic services I only have a handful of VM's running.

--- End quote ---

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version