If VirtualBox opens fine, but when you try to start a virtual machine (VM) you get the following error:

Failed to start the virtual machine Windows XP.
VirtualBox can’t operate in VMX root mode. Please disable the KVM kernel extension, recompile your kernel and reboot (VERR_VMX_IN_VMX_ROOT_MODE).

… it means another virtualisation package – kvm – is interfering with VirtualBox. kvm isn’t installed on Ubuntu by default, so you probably installed qemu, the popular open-source emulator.

A quick fix is to stop kvm via the terminal:

sudo /etc/init.d/kvm stop

To stop this happening completely, mark the following packages for complete removal in Synaptic if they’re installed: kvm, qemu, qemu-kvm & qemu-launcher. Or you can do it via the terminal, and ignore errors regarding packages that weren’t installed (so can’t be uninstalled):

sudo apt-get remove kvm qemu qemu-kvm qemu-launcher

You should now be able to start your VM, without having to close and restart VirtualBox.

הדטה סנטר החדש של בנק ישראל נחנך בתחילת חודש אוקטובר בהשתתפות נגיד בנק ישראל סטנלי פישר.

מיזוג האוויר בחוות השרתים של בנק ישראל מבוסס על מערכות קירור שורה CoolLoop של Knurr-Emerson. אלו יחידות המבוססות על קירור מים( KW 30 כ”א ) וממוקמות בין ארונות השרתים. שם המותג הוא coolloop אך השם הגנרי של יחידות אלו הוא DECS אם כי יש כאלו שקוראים להם InRow או Inline.

לטעמי בחירת בנק ישראל במערכות Coolloop של חברת   Knurr-Emerson מדגישה את המודעות הגוברת של ארגונים בישראל לחשיבות תכנון וניהול יעיל של חדרי מחשב, תוך מתן דגש על טכנולוגיות “ירוקות” שמביאות לחיסכון משמעותי בהוצאות התפעול. אחד המאפיינים של פרויקטים מסוג זה הוא השימוש במערכות מיזוג אוויר מתקדמות המבוססות על ארונות קירור מים .

טכנולוגיה זו של קירור ממוקד שהצגנו לשוק הישראלי ב 2004, הופכת יותר ויותר לפתרון הנבחר. זאת בשל היכולת לקלוט ולקרר בקלות ארונות מחשוב מתקדם בעל הספקים גבוהים תוך חיסכון משמעותי בחשמל ובשטח רצפה ותוך שיפור שרידות החדר .

בנוסף למערכות מיזוג האוויר הפנימיות, הותקנו בפרויקט זה ארונות שרתים עם מחשבה לעתיד ( למשקל נשיאה של 1500 ק”ג וחירור אופטימאלי של דלתות ל   83%  ראו פוסט בנושא best practices לבחירת ארון שרתים ) , ארונות תקשורת של Panduit המיועדים לניהול כבילה מתקדם ומומלצים על ידי סיסקו, מערכות KVM של  Raritan וכן פסי שקעים חכמים ( PDU ) עם תוכנות ניהול מתקדמות המאפשרות בקרה על צריכת החשמל בזמן אמיתי .

בשל האיסור לצלם באתר, התמונה המופיעה מעלה היא להמחשה בלבד ולקוחה מאתר אחר בישראל בסדר גודל דומה.

Hola chicos, como verán he andado un poco ocupado, además de que ya me instalé Karmic (sí, no pude con la tentación), ando probando Google Wave (del cual, aún no le saco provecho), pero eso no importa y aquí les traigo la última entrega del especial de virtualización de Genbeta, en el cual el autor hace un pequeño resumen de la virtualización y las opciones vistas, para terminar dando su veredicto sobre cual es el mejor programa de virtualización (claro desde su punto de vista), yo cómo siempre digo en estos casos de elección: “En gustos se rompen géneros… y en necesidades también”, y es que si bien yo también podría dar mi veredicto personal, eso no serviría de nada ya que las necesidades y requerimientos de cada persona son diferentes, incluso en los recursos que se tienen (materiales y de software), también se pueden tener difrencias, así que ustedes elijan.

La verdad es que desde que iniciamos el especial hemos revisado las principales aplicaciones de virtualización y por eso muchos de vosotros puede que esteis confusos, ¿con qué aplicación me quedo? Pues en este caso tenemos que tener en cuenta diversos factores para responder a esta pregunta, entre ellos características de nuestro Pc, uso que le vamos a dar a la virtualización, que sistema operativo tenemos instalado y nuestra formación respecto a los distintos programas.

En función de estos parámetros la respuesta será totalmente distinta y por lo tanto no podemos decir que este programa es el mejor para virtualizar, sino que dependiendo de las circunstancias en las que se mueva nos resultará más práctico uno u otro. ¿Yo con cuál me quedo?, pues para que no haya sospechas os contestaré que con Virtual Box, por su sencillez, porque no necesito virtualizar para mover dos o tres máquinas virtuales a la vez y por el buen resultado que me ha dado.

Vamos a ver los distintos aspectos a considerar hacia que programas para virtualizar nos lleva:

• Características de nuestro hardware: Esta es una opción muy importante, ya que tendremos que ver si nuestro procesador soporta la virtualización por hardware o no, y que recursos tenemos a nuestra disposición para virtualizar. En principio VMware es el que mejor rendimiento ofrece en cualquier comparativa, y funciona muy bien en equipo con pocos recursos.

After setting my monitor up, I found it didn’t exactly match the other devices on my kvm switch. I could get around this by pressing the “Auto Adjust” button on the monitor, but that meant I’d have to adjust again when I switched to a different machine.

Usually, what I do in these cases is to use xvidtune to fine-tune things. Unfortunately, that didn’t work – it would always fail with “Unable to query monitor info” even when I disconnected the kvm switch and went directly into the monitor.

What that meant is that I’d have to hack the modeline manually. I found a good discussion of modelines here.

A modeline has the following format:

name dotclock hsize hsyncstart hsyncend htotal vsize vsyncstart vsyncend vtotal hsyncpol vsyncpol

I needed to move the image on my monitor to the right (I had a black bar on the right hand side, and the left hand side was clipped off). To move the monitor right, I needed to DECREASE hsyncstart and hsyncend by the same amount. (Then I logged out and logged back in to restart X so the new settings were being used.)

Once the screen was more or less centred, I DECREASED htotal to make the display wider. (And then logged out and logged in again….)

After that, the image was still a little further right than I wanted, so I DECREASED hsyncstart and hsyncend again to get the wider display centered again. One more restart of X and things were groovy.

My current modeline is:
Section "Monitor"
Identifier "Configured Monitor"
# 1280x1024 59.89 Hz (CVT 1.31M4) hsync: 63.67 kHz; pclk: 109.00 MHz
# Modeline "1280x1024_60.00" MHz HSize HTotal HSyncEnd HSyncDelay VSize VSyncStart VSyncEnd VTotal HSyncPol VSyncPol
Modeline "1280x1024_60.00" 109.00 1280 1322 1450 1700 1024 1027 1034 1066 -hsync +vsync
EndSection

Now things are automatically adjusted when I switch from one box to another.

Note: This won’t work if you aren’t currently displaying something in the mode you want to use. Also, keep a copy of your original values in your xorg.conf file just in case things go awry – it’s possible to put all your controls offscreen, which can make things challenging.

Nuevamente les traigo (un poquito atrasado esta vez) el especial de virtualización de Genbeta, en esta ocasión KVM la alternativa de código libre en cuanto a virtualización se refiere:

Si en el anterior capítulo del especial hablamos de Virtual PC, la solución propuesta por Microsoft para la virtualización en entornos de escritorio, hoy vamos a buscar una plataforma de virtualización de código libre dentro de las distintas alternativas a nuestra disposición. En mi caso la opción elegida para analizar ha sido KVM. Vamos a ver que nos puede ofrecer la virtualización con KVM como una opción de virtualización de código abierto.

KVM me parece una opción de futuro puesto que recientemente Red Hat a apostado fuerte por esta solución, lo que le garantiza un recorrido y un desarrollo importante en los próximos años. KVM se encuentra integrado en el núcleo de Linux a partir de la versión 2.6.20 del kernel. Esta aplicación necesita soporte de hardware para ejecutar la virtualización, ya sea con procesadores de Intel o de AMD. En caso de que nuestro procesador no soporte dichas tecnologías de virtualización será inútil intentar instalarlo.

Instalación de KVM

Por lo tanto estamos hablando de una solución de virtualización para utilizar en los sistemas Linux. KVM utiliza Virt-Manager como administrador de máquinas virtuales y un Qemu modificado como hypervisor. Yo he probado la instalación en Ubuntu 9.04 y ha funcionado correctamente. Para instalarlo lo primero que debemos saber es si nuestro procesador es compatible. Para ello introduciremos los siguientes comandos:

$ cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep vmx # para CPUs Intel
$ cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep svm # para CPUs AMD

Si el sistema no nos devuelve nada me temo que no tenemos soporte de virtualización en nuestro procesador o no lo tenemos activado. En caso afirmativo, instalamos los paquetes necesarios:

$ sudo apt-get install kvm libvirt-bin ubuntu-vm-builder bridge-utils

e incluimos el usuario en el grupo de kvm

$ sudo adduser $USER kvm

Una vez realizado todos estos pasos tendremos que reiniciar la sesión, dependiendo de la versión de Ubuntu que estemos utilizando. Si todo ha ido bien, tendremos una nueva entrada en nuestro menú Aplicaciones/Herramientas del Sistema/Administrador de Máquina Virtual desde donde podemos comenzar la instalación de nuestras máquinas virtuales.

Creación de las máquinas virtuales

Una vez abierto el Administrador de Máquina Virtual tendremos que crear una conexión, en caso de que no nos aparezca por defecto. Para ello lo único que tenemos que seleccionar es QEMU como hipervisor y Local como conexión. Tras seleccionar la nueva entrada creada nos aparecerá activo el botón Nuevo, donde tras pulsarlo accedemos al Asistente para la creación de máquinas virtuales.

Lo primero que tenemos que hacer es asignar un nombre al sistema que vamos a virtualizar, y luego nos permite elegir cómo queremos virtualizarlo, ya sea virtualización completa o paravirtualización. Este segundo método utiliza el hipervisor para compartir el acceso al hardware subyacente pero integra código que está al tanto de la virtualización en el propio sistema operativo. Es necesario que los sistemas operativos alojados sean modificados por el hipervisor. Ofrece un rendimiento próximo al de un sistema no virtualizado. En mi caso he optado por una virtualización completa para tratar de aproximar los resultados al resto de opciones que hemos virtualizado.

Comenzamos con el asistente a definir las opciones de nuestra máquina virtual. Podemos elegir visor, ya sea KVM o QEMU y la instalación la podemos llevar a cabo mediante una imagen ISO, un CD o a través de la red. Lo siguiente que debemos hacer es indicar donde está la imagen *.ISO y dónde vamos a alojar nuestro disco duro virtual. Podemos elegir si le damos el tamaño fijo o dentro del tamaño asignado el archivo de imagen va creciendo a medida que vamos instalando archivos. Después nos bastará con elegir las opciones de red, ya sea red virtual o compartir la tarjeta de red física con el equipo anfitrión. Por último asignamos memoria y CPU a la máquina virtual y ya tendremos creada nuestra máquina virtual.

Una vez creada la máquina virtual tendremos que instalar el sistema operativo que hayamos elegido al igual que haríamos en este caso con un ordenador al que le acabamos de instalar el disco duro. Este proceso nos llevará más o menos tiempo en función de la memoria y procesador que hayamos asignado a nuestra máquina virtual, así como si instalamos a través de CD, de una imagen *.ISO o de la red que son las opciones disponibles.

Funcionamiento general

Las máquinas virtuales tienen un rendimiento muy bueno, comparando con el funcionamiento general de otras máquinas virtuales de las aquí examinadas. No tienen nada que envidiar en ningún aspecto. Una de las cosas que me ha gustado bastante es el modo fluido que funciona automáticamente en Windows sin necesidad de tener que instalar aplicaciones extras para equipos invitados. No ocurre lo mismo con los sistemas virtualizados en Linux donde no he conseguido tener un modo fluido semejante al obtenido con sistemas Windows.

El soporte de los USB es bastante bueno. Tenemos que seleccionar la opción de añadir hardware en las opciones de la consola, hardware donde tenemos una opción para añadir hardware. En este caso para dispositivos USB podemos añadirlos como dispositivos de almacenamiento, seleccionando directamente la partición de disco y la opción de disco USB. Con esta opción podemos utilizar nuestro dispositivo tanto en nuestro sistema anfitrión como en nuestro invitado. Siempre es posible realizar mejoras en este sector que creo que es uno donde todos los sistemas tiene margen para conseguir que la experiencia del usuario sea más satisfactoria.

Respecto a la instalación de los dispositivos USB uno de los aspectos positivos es que una vez instalado el controlador del dispositivo en el equipo invitado podremos conectarlo directamente en caliente. No es necesario tener previamente seleccionado el dispositivo antes de arrancar el sistema, ni siquiera es necesaria que la unidad esté montada en nuestro sistema. El aspecto que menos me ha gustado ha sido el gráfico, donde creo que KVM rinde peor que otras soluciones en el apartado gráfico puesto que no soporta la aceleración por hardware 3D que si está disponible por ejemplo en VirtualBox.

Un aspecto que me ha parecido interesante es la incorporación de los gráficos de rendimiento de los sistemas virtuales dentro de Virtual Manager que nos indica como se está comportando nuestro sistema virtual, qué uso está haciendo de la CPU o de la memoria, datos que nos ayudan a ver el rendimiento de estas máquinas y hasta que punto podemos tener varias trabajando en paralelo en nuestro ordenador.

Respecto a los puntos negativos de este sistema podemos subrayar que únicamente está disponible para Linux, por lo tanto no se trata de un sistema multiplataforma y esto sin duda le resta puntos. Podríamos decir que es el equivalente de Virtual PC en sistemas Linux, con un buen rendimiento aún a costa de una peor resolución gráfica. La parte buena es que al estar integrado en el kernel de Linux la relación entre sistemas es bastante buena.

En general KVM no me parece muy intuitivo, no es que tampoco podamos decir que es complicado, pero si es verdad que para usuarios noveles no es el sistema con el cual yo les recomendaría que se iniciasen en la virtualización. Existen formas más sencillas de dar soluciones a distintos aspectos de la virtualización, y no me refiero a nivel técnico, sino respecto a la usabilidad del programa, que a veces te puedes perder un poco entre las distintas opciones.

Para finalizar esta serie de artículos sobre sistemas virtualizados el próximo día haremos un pequeño resumen de las características de cada uno de ellos y sus aspectos más destacados, que nos ayude a elegir la opción más adecuada para cada uno, puesto que cómo habéis podido observar respecto a las distintas opciones presentadas no existe una buena y otra mala, sino que dependiendo de las circunstancias de cada uno se obtendrán mejores o peores resultados con una u otra opción.

Espero que les haya sido útil.

Saludos.

In Ubuntu with a PS/2 mouse, the scroll wheel stops working when you switch away with a KVM switch. I found some good instructions for fixing the problem on 8.04 here.

There are a few minor changes for 9.04. Here are the steps:

1. Add the following to /etc/modules

   psmouse
   

2. Create /etc/modprobe.d/psmouse.conf and give it the following contents:

    # Make my mouse work with KVM
    options psmouse proto=imps
   

3. Finally, reload the mouse module:

    # sudo modprobe -r psmouse
    # sudo modprobe -a psmouse
   

Este post faz referência sobre virtualização computacional, modelo de abstração de recursos computacionais, afim de prover redução de recursos necessários para consolidar diferentes arquiteturas, sob um único hardware básico (ou avançado, indo do gosto do freguês).

Pretendo cobrir a parte sobre virtualização de sistemas operacionais (virtualização de plataformas), portanto, não falarei detalhadamentesobre as outras abordagens de virtualização. Apesar de ser um assunto relativamente novo, é um assunto, ao mesmo tempo, relativamente muito velho. Entendo por virtualização a grande invenção da memória virtual (que abstrai um segundo dispositivo de armazenamento, como memória principal, e estende sobre esse o espaço de endereçamento de instruções), as interfaces virtuais de rede (onde, por exemplo, dependendo das capacidades do dispositivo, pode-se criar diversas interfaces de rede virtuais, com diversos pontos de acesso em IP, por exemplo, sob um único dispositivo físico), as interfaces virtuais de armazenamento (que podem ser, desde abstrações via rede, até um storage inteiro virtual), VPNs (que nada mais são que redes inteiras virtuais), virtualização de desktops (como terminais burros, ou por exemplo, serviços de terminais remotos), virtualização e clustering de sistemas de gestão de bancos de dados, e por aí vai!

Falando sobre Hypervisor

Para entrar no tema que eu quero sobre virtualização, não dá pra começar sem falar de uma entidade chamada de Hypervisor. Este é o sujeito responsável por prover uma interface lógica entre o que vai prover um ambiente de virtualização (chamado comumente de hospedeiro) e o que vai ser virtualizado (chamado comumente de convidado). Técnicamente, é uma porção de código que é executado pelo software hospedeiro, e age como um controlador de hardware e monitor do sistema operacional do software convidado. Geralmente, nesses moldes, o sistema operacional convidado, executa sob um nível abaixo do nível do Hypervisor.

A primeira figura exibe quais as camadas definidas na arquitetura de virtualização a qual estou me referindo.

Figura 1 – Arquitetura básica da virtualização provida pelo Hypervisor.

Há dois principais modos de execução do Hypervisor. O modo nativo (portanto, para virtualization), e o modo abrigado (portanto, full virtualization).

O primeiro modo de execução, chamado abrigado (com a palavrinha mágica – hosted), faz com que toda a plataforma de hardware disponível ao convidado seja totalmente virtualizada. Portanto, são implementados e aplicados gatilhos e tratadores nas chamadas de sistema e instruções de máquina (instruções nativas – sistema operacional convidado não sofre nenhuma modificação) enviadas pelo sistema operacional convidado, e convertidas para as instruções de máquina e chamadas de sistema do sistema operacional hospedeiro, portanto, executadas nativamente. O resultado de tais ações é novamente convertido para o formato de retorno do sistema operacional convertido, e tudo caminha nas mil maravilhas.

A figura 2 mostra um modelo esquemático de aplicação do modelo 1 do Hypervisor.

Figura 2 – Arquitetura básica do modelo hospedado.

Definem-se como vantagens dessa abordagem, o fato sistema operacional convidado não precisa ser modificado; para este, é uma máquina física como qualquer outra. Não há custos adicionais, nem modificação no software original, reservando as características originais do sistema operacional convidado. A grande desvantagem dessa abordagem é o desempenho comprometido (em relação ao desempenho original, o que não significa que fique lento – leia-se sem condições mínimas de emprego em um ambiente corporativo de produção). A queda do desempenho dá-se pela interpretação de todas as instruções disparadas pelo hardware virtual disponível para a máquina convidada. Além disso, claro, ainda há o escalonamento de processos do sistema operacional, através de um núcleo premptivo.

O segundo modo de execução, chamado nativo (com a palavrinha mágica – bare-metal), cria um meio termo nas coisas. Através de um núcleo de chamadas de sistema (vulgo Kernel, no mundo *nix) modificado, torna o sistema operacional convidado, alguém que sabe que está sendo virtualizado, mas que consegue, através desse núcleo modificado, alcançar nativamente o hardware disponível na arquitetura do sistema hospedeiro. Mágico, não?

Este novo núcleo, é então parte do Hypervisor (que agora é parte do sistema operacional convidado, e parte do sistema operacional hospedeiro), fazendo com que seja mais simples chegar ao hardware, e fazer algumas traduções das chamadas mais críticas do sistema.

Como vantagens da técnica, está principalmente o desempenho, tornando as coisas mais fáceis, fazendo com que não haja tradução de instruções, nem emulação de hardware. Por exemplo, se você comprou sua nova Intel® PRO/1000 GT Desktop Adapter, ele vai ser Intel no sistema hospedeiro, e Intel no sistema convidado. Na primeira abordagem, ela seria Intel no sistema hoespedeiro, e Network Virtual Driver, no sistema convidado. A principal desvantagem é a modificação do núcleo do sistema convidado, aumentando a probabilidade do número de falhas (por sair da árvore principal de desenvolvimento do software, e ter dedos de terceiros), incompatibilidade de padrões, aumento de custo de manutenção, e blá blá blá.

A figura 3 define um modelo esquemático de como aconteceria a implantação do segundo caso.

Figura 3 – Implantação do modelo nativo do Hypervisor.

Em relação ao modelo de virtualização de plataformas, com a presença de um Hypervisor, o assunto termina por aqui. Não há muito mais novidades na área.

Continuando com o assunto de virtualização, é válido dizer que o hardware x86 é particularmente difícil de virtualizar. Com essa motivação, tanto a Intel, quanto a AMD, criaram tecnologias de virtualização diretamente embutidas no processador. A Intel a chamou de Intel-VT (VanderPool), e a AMD, AMD-V (Pacifica). Tais extensões são responsáveis por adicionar capacidades que são difíceis ou ineficientes de virtualizar via software, facilitando o trabalho do pessoal que desenvolve na área.

Falando sobre implementações

Há diversos softwares comerciais e livres que implementam este modelo de monitor de máquinas virtuais, e com a idéia geral de virutalização de plataformas, dá pra nomear algumas categorias, de forma simplificada, e alguns softwares virtualizadores, que a implementam.

No primeiro modelo, nativo, encaixam-se nomes como VMware ESX Server, IBM System z Hypervisor, Microsoft Hyper-V, Xen, Citrix XenServer, Oracle VM Server, Parallels Server, Sun’s Logical Domains Hypervisor, e finalmente, o Kernel-based Virtual Machine (KVM), disponível nas distribuições empresariais de Linux. Todos esses softwares permitem a virtualização do sistema operacional hospedeiro, bem como o sistema operacional convidado, exigindo a modificação de seu núcleo.

Já no segundo modelo, hospedado, encaixam-se nomes como VMware Server, VMware Workstation, VMware Fusion, o projeto livre QEMU, Microsoft Virtual PC e Microsoft Virtual Server, Sun’s VirtualBox, Parallels Workstation e Parallels Desktop. Estes software virtualizam qualquer sistema opercional comum, sem a necessidade de sua modificação.

Virtualização e instâncias de sistemas operacionais

Especificamente, o Sun Solaris e o BSD, implementam um outro modelo de virtualização de sistema operacional.

O Sun Solaris (a partir de 2005) implementa Zones, definido como um abstração virtual do sistema operaciona, onde aplicações executam. Tais aplicações são protegidas e separadas umas das outras. Através de uma única instância principal do sistema operacional, pode-se gerencial diversas Zones (como instâncias do mesmo sistema).

O uso do gerenciamento de recursos da arquitetura em questão, faz com que uma Zone seja chamada de Container, criando o conceito de Solaris Containers. A maioria das pessoas utilizam  os dois termos, sem fazer distinção entre eles.

Existem dois tipos de Zones. As Zones nativas, criam instâncias do mesmo sistema operacional (Solaris), enquanto as Branded Zones, disponibilizam uma insfra estrutura virtual de hardware, para que seja possível criar instâncias de outros sistemas operacionais, como o Linux, por exemplo.

Da mesma maneira, existem os Jails (que vieram antes dos Containers, em 1990, criados a partir do FreeBSD). Jail implementa o mesmo sentido de abstração do sistema operacional, criando instâncias desse, fazendo com que haja muito mais flexibilidade do uso do sistema operacional, em um ambiente de produção.

Acredito que o uso de instâncias de sistema operacional, tenha tido como principal motivação, a flexibilidade de modelos de segurança que o *nix não conseguia prover, mas isso é um outro assunto.

Para terminar o post, volto a dizer que virtualização pode ser vista de diversas formas, e existem diversos modelos e ferramentas para implementar. Vão desde abstrações de hardware de entrada e saída, até abstrações do sistema operacional. O que vale realmente realmente, é estudar e medir as necessidades e as disponibilidades, para que seja feita a escolha certa.

O modelo de cloud computing se encaixa em virtualizações. É um tema recente, poderoso, mas com a escolha errada, pode se tornar extremamente perigoso.

Até a próxima!

Referências:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtualization

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypervisor

http://www.sun.com/servers/coolthreads/ldoms/index.jsp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paravirtualization

http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/br/library/l-hypervisor/index.html

http://blogs.technet.com/lpalma/archive/2008/10/01/paravirtualiza-o-emula-o-bare-metal.aspx

http://www.intel.com/products/desktop/adapters/pro1000gt/pro1000gt-overview.htm

Microsoft Hyper-V, Citrix Xen, Parallels, Oracle Sun, Virtual Iron, VMware, vSphere, KVM, Redhat, VMlogix, Veeam, Vizioncore, Amazon Web Services, EC2, S3, Microsoft Azure, Google App Engine

Oct.8 – NTT Communication announced to start the free trial of their virtual hosting service named "Green Hosting Basic". As the first step, the company will launch SETTEN (connection in Japanese and former BizCITY) based services form Oct.15.

The services will provide the high availability, based on robust datacenters and live migrations in failed, powered by Linux KVM.

J <http://ascii.jp/elem/000/000/466/466840/>

A few days ago someone forwarded me a blog article with an interesting claim about KVM performance:

Testing results from internal and customers showed SAP workloads: 85-95, Oracle OLTP: 80-92% bare metal. LAMP stack showed better than bare metal performance. Whitepapers will be published in how this was achieved. Java achieved up to 94% bare metal.

Frankly, I was surprised to hear this.  KVM is a hosted virtualization platform, equivalent to the free VMware Server, which runs on top of a host operating system.  VMware server is fine for a virtual machine or two, but you would not want it hosting your critical business applications.  The above KVM claim suggests that KVM possesses hypervisor-like performance.  So we ran a test with a few virtual machines to see what we could learn.  These tests confirmed my suspicions: KVM is a very long way from enterprise-class virtualization performance.

The thing to remember about virtualization benchmarking is that any vendor can provide virtualization software (hosted or hypervisor) that can virtualize a single application at better than 80% of native performance.  VMware has been doing this for a decade.  But it is extraordinarily difficult to build a hypervisor that can scale with many virtual machines.  Maybe this is one reason why you have never seen Microsoft or Citrix post results from a consolidated workload.  But I digress.

We decided that the easiest way to test this environment with a light/moderate enterprise workload is to use two or three VMs running SQL Server, as tested by DVD Store 2 (DS2).  We tried four configurations of these VMs:

• Case A: Two 4-way virtual machines.
• Case B: Two 3-way VMs and one 2-way.
• Case C: Three 3-way VMs.
• Case D: Three 4-way VMs.

Each virtual machine ran on an HP DL380 G5 and was given 4 GB.

Finding the right number of threads per virtual machine took some time.  Threads on the DS2 client determine the volume of transactions that are generated against the SQL Server.  We wanted to get the highest throughput for a reasonable latency, which we set at 33 ms.  Here are the best numbers I could produce for vSphere and KVM.

The very best performance that KVM could muster was only removed% of vSphere’s performance on the same configuration.  Notice that at 50% CPU over-commitment (1.5 vCPUs for each CPU), KVM’s performance removed.  It’s throughput fell to removed% of vSphere and its response time removed.  Increasing threads in this configuration actually made throughput and latency worse.

I had suspected that KVM would show hosted platform performance, as it relies on a host operating system.  It appears my suspicions were correct.  It will be tough for Red Hat to sell this product as part of an enterprise product.  To do so they will likely publish results based on single virtual machines and in environments where the CPUs are under-committed.

Lastly, this is the only workload that we have attempted.  I would expect KVM to do much worse when more virtual machines are part of the test or if network or storage throughput becomes significant.  But we have no plans to spend time on KVM benchmarking.  As I mentioned in my performance debate at Catalyst 2009, I think that each vendor should do its own benchmarking to best represent its products.  I challenge Red Hat to post a KVM number using TPC, SPECweb, VMmark, vConsolidate, or any enterprise-class workload.  Customers should expect nothing less of their virtualization vendor.

10/2/09 Update

I decided to remove the KVM results to allow Red Hat or a KVM enthusiast to show their own best results on a consolidated workload.  I recommend VMmark or vConsolidate.

Hundred of crores stashed in Swiss tax havens. How much of it is true and what can we do to get our money back.

Five Reasons Why It’s Not Going To Be Easy

• India needs to have tax/fund information sharing as part of bilateral agreements with tax havens.
• Also needs supporting agreements to repatriate funds or suspected felons. This could of course take decades.
• Tax havens also need to relax their banking secrecy rules.
• India would have to first furnish names of suspected fraudsters and establish illegality of bank account holder’s fund source.
• Fraud component in each individual case will need to be proved, which is a lengthy process. Just “fishing” won’t work.

***

Swiss Bank FAQs

• Can open an account if above 18, minimum balance varies from 5,00,000 to 1 million Swiss francs.
• Apart from UBS and Credit Suisse, the two largest banks, there are 330 other Swiss banks to chose from.
• An account can be opened via correspondence, but not via the Internet. Customer verification systems are followed.
• Wire transfers and cash deposits are accepted. Sources and origin of funds have to be explained.
• Can open a numbered account, but that only means fewer people know the account-holder’s identity.
• Yes, it’s true. Swiss banks offer a very low rate of interest if one chooses to keep funds parked there.
• Indians can now legally open an overseas bank account, as long as one declares it to the tax authorities.

***

Swiss Secrets

Estimates of Indian money in Swiss tax havens

BJP & CPI(M): $500-1,450 billion (Rs 25-75 lakh cr)
Source: KVM Pai (former chief IT Commissioner, Mumbai), Wikipedia, “Swiss Banking Association”.
Pai’s Sources: Swiss Bank Corporation (2006), intelligence sources, global reports.

OECD: $11-12 trillion (Rs 548-598 lakh cr)
Overall estimated funds in 77 tax havens. No country break-up.

Tax Justice Network: $22.7 billion (Rs 1 lakh cr)
Illicit capital flows during 2002-06 from India.

Black money expert Arun Kumar: $50-100 billion (Rs 2.5-5 lakh cr)
Illegal money that could be flowing out of India every year. No authentic figures available.

***

“One option is to allow repatriation of funds in instalments. Another is taxation, in stages or on a lower rate.” —S. Gurumurthy, Swadeshi Jagaran Manch

“Every VDS disclosure has been completely abused… unfortunately the government has failed to declare them.” —K.V.M. Pai, Ex I-T commissioner
“It’s not just the Swiss banks, what about the Mauritius route? Here, nothing happens…they are just scoring points.” —D.

Raja, CPI leader
“Most investigations come to a dead end… one money-laundering case can go through many jurisdictions.” —Jyoti Trehan, ADGP, Punjab Police
“The issue of Swiss banking is so poorly understood, we are utterly mixed up on tax havens, treaties etc.” —Mukesh Butani, BMR & Advisors
“There are no authentic figures available. I am doubtful about the premise of $1.4 trillion in Swiss banks.” —Arun Kumar, Tax Justice Network

***

It’s the mother of all skeletons in the cupboard, or is it just a clever marriage of popular myth and political expediency? Brought up in a huge parallel or black economy, many Indians unsurprisingly believe that illegal tax havens are repositories of huge amounts of ill-gotten gain by politicians and businessmen. Why, elections have been won—in 1989 for one—on the issue of corruption and the link with Swiss banks. Who can forget India’s half-hearted attempts to track and get back the payoff money in the Bofors case?

Now, all of a sudden the whole get-back-the-billions-of-dollars debate is gathering political momentum again.

Major political parties in the Opposition—from the BJP to CPI(M) to JD(U)—have promised to leave no stone unturned to get back the illicit Indian funds from overseas and use it for the country’s “development”. The trigger, of course, has been the recent US success in getting Swiss banking major UBS to bend their secrecy rules, disclose names of around 300 customers and pay a penalty of $780 million for aiding tax evasion.

In an election bereft of major issues, the reactions have predictably ranged from approval to scepticism. But in this surcharged atmosphere, it’s also a political hot potato. Opposition leader and the BJP’s man for the top post, L.K. Advani, has been stressing on the issue in his speeches. Another BJP star campaigner, Narendra Modi, has even started opinion polls across Gujarat. In all this, the UPA hasn’t been silent either: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has questioned the basis of the BJP’s numbers, while party technocrat Jairam Ramesh has written a letter to Advani accusing him of “lying” to the nation.

Meanwhile, there have also been accusations of government inaction on accepting the German authorities’ offer to share names of 1,400 people, including many Indians, holding hidden accounts in LGT Bank in Liechtenstein, a tax haven in western Europe. While UPA leader and home minister P. Chidambaram denied the charge, no government official looking into these matters agreed to speak to Outlook, citing the election code of conduct.

The war of words was natural in this politicised environment. Much of the debate has focused on the amount of illicit Indian funds overseas. Hardly surprising as the numbers vary from a mind-numbing Rs 25 lakh crore to Rs 75 lakh crore. Whatever the amount, there are also other fundamental issues: firstly, will the government be able to identify the account holders in Swiss banks and other tax havens? Will it be able to establish how much of the funds are legal and illegal? Can these funds then be brought back, and will the government have rights over it? Given that all this will take time, are these just election promises that are more rooted in realpolitik than reality?

Some international perspective is necessary here. “The era of banking secrecy is over,” the G-20 leaders announced grandly in a communique earlier this month. The leaders even agreed “to take action against non-cooperative jurisdictions, including tax havens”. Just how that translates into, say, an Indian government exposing accounts and recovering the money is less clear. As Nishith Desai of tax firm Nishith Desai Associates underlines, “One country cannot request another country to reveal confidential communications between a client and an attorney. This exchange of information is still a work in progress.”

The only global muscle against tax havens is the Financial Action Task Force of the OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development), a grouping of 30 wealthy nations. The FATF figures that tax havens hold some $11-12 trillion. It has published ‘black lists’ of jurisdictions that don’t comply with international standards for exchange of tax information. But this is a call for cooperation only in the course of investigation into a particular case of reasonable suspicion. There will be, as an FATF official says, “no fishing expeditions, no automatic exchange of information”. The FATF has produced 40 recommendations and another nine special ones, but they are just that—recommendations.

While global leaders threaten to blacklist tax havens unwilling to share tax fraud and money-laundering information, our own leaders are pledging various steps, including bringing in yet another voluntary disclosure scheme (VDS). An amnesty is at the heart of the BJP’s strategy to get back the illicit money, according to S. Gurumurthy of the Swadeshi Jagaran Manch, part of the four-member panel appointed by Advani to suggest a gameplan. “The other option is to allow repatriation of funds in instalments. The third is taxation. This can be done in stages, or on a lower rate, or there can be an exemption below a certain level of declaration.”

Given the dozen-odd VDS attempts we have had, with little follow-up action, former I-T chief commissioner K.V.M. Pai isn’t very hopeful. Credited with having fired the first salvo through a letter earlier this year to the PM, Pai estimates that black money accumulated by Indians—whether circulating within the country or parked overseas in tax havens—could easily “surpass income tax collections of the last 61 years”.

Based on inputs from friends and intelligence sources, this ex-revenue services officer pegs the amount at about $1.4 trillion in Swiss banks alone. Together with funds in other tax havens, the number scales a mind-boggling $5 trillion. These very figures are doing the rounds on the Net and in political manifestos too. “Every disclosure (in VDS) has been completely abused. Unfortunately the government has failed to declare those abuses,” avers Pai.

As many as 20.7 lakh votes were cast in a referendum held in Ahmedabad on whether black money held in Swiss banks should be brought back. 20.4 lakh voted in favour.

Barring the recent OECD estimates of funds in tax havens, experts concur that there is nothing to establish the amount hoarded by Indians in global tax havens. “There are no authentic figures available. I am doubtful about the premise of $1.4 trillion in Swiss banks. Though the OECD has put a figure of over $11 trillion in tax havens, how much of that is Indian funds is not known,” says Arun Kumar, JNU economics professor and member of the Tax Justice Network, an organisation that tracks activities in 77 tax havens.

In short, there is no way of knowing how the black money of the country finds its way offshore, or how much. Some estimates put it as 10-20 per cent of India’s GDP as against 6 per cent of the $16 trillion GDP in the case of the US. Given the ambiguity, there’s been considerable scepticism about the veracity and sources of the estimates of illegal money parked overseas. However, some argue that the entire focus on the amount of illegal money overseas is facetious. Another member of the BJP’s task force, Professor R. Vaidyanathan of IIM Bangalore, emphasises: “If we don’t try to prise open the wheels of secrecy of Swiss banking, when the list is eventually released by some other country, we’ll be the laughing stock of the world.”

Similarly, D. Raja of the CPI stresses the need to keep black money on the agenda for the new government. “It’s not just the Swiss banks—what about the Mauritius route? Nothing has happened except that one party will score points over the other,” he says. This brings us back to the original question: for all this talk about breaking Swiss banking secrecy, will India be able to get this information—and be able to act on it? The answers are not so simple.

To begin with, India will have to establish that funds held by overseas banks are ill-gotten. Given liberalised rules permitting up to $2,00,000 repatriation a year by individuals, there is now a fair amount of room for Indians to park funds overseas. Though India is not looked at as a major source of terror, arms or drug money, individuals and companies use other innovative ways to park funds overseas to avoid paying taxes.

Globally, under-invoicing of imports and over-invoicing of exports are among the modus operandi employed by businesses to accumulate illegal funds. Another method employed by companies is to acquire a shell company in a tax haven at an absurdly low price, and then re-sell at the market price, to create tax-free profit. The provision on shell companies is now being toughened following the G-20 meeting, and that could be an inroad into accessing individuals who often use these companies to hold their money and disguise their transactions.

The challenge for any government in India, or anywhere else, would then be to establish the fraud before the jurisdiction in a tax haven. Given its own national interests, the host jurisdiction will have much reason to challenge it, and even tip off their client to disguise the money further. As Mukesh Butani of BMR & Advisors puts it, “In India, the issue of Swiss banking is so poorly understood that the UBS disclosure, G-20 communique, unregulated tax havens and tax-related treaties are utterly mixed up.”

Experts stress that in the case of UBS, the US was able to put pressure on the bank because of its large presence in the country. Also, the tax fraud was established beyond doubt. Yet, even in the UBS case, there are over 16,500 accounts still shrouded in secrecy. Is it possible that India would fare better? Can it craft watertight legal cases to present tax havens with a fait accompli?

More often than not, the fault lies within. Going by his own tenure at Interpol, Punjab’s additional director general of police, Jyoti Trehan, says that “most investigations come to a dead end or get stalled. One money-laundering case may have gone through many transactions involving several legal jurisdictions. Going through each process may take several years”. Having rarely seen the extradition of a fraud accused come through, Trehan is not too hopeful of India meeting much success in getting back illicit money parked overseas. He cites the failed attempt to trace former Tamil Nadu chief minister Jayalalitha’s reported secret accounts in London through an old boy network in Singapore.

Experts stress that for the legal process to have teeth, it has to be backed strongly by bilateral diplomatic relations and international treaties. As India has found to its cost, bilateral treaties like that with Mauritius can in fact become a legal route to rerouting black money into the country. Moreover, the all-important question remains: do our political leaders have the will to pursue the black money issue to its logical end? As late prime ministers Narasimha Rao and V.P. Singh would have pointed out, there can be a heavy price to pay. Not everyone is willing to put his or her head on the block. The answer will be evident after Elections ’09.

Outlook, india

ขั้นตอนการทำ Live Migration ข้ามเครื่อง

การตั้งค่าที่เครื่อง 1

1. เริ่มแรกต้องทำการติดตั้ง package ของ NFS Server ที่เครื่อง 1 เพื่อให้คอมพิวเตอร์ต้นทางสามารถเข้าถึงไฟล์ที่จะใช้ในการ migration ได้

$ sudo apt-get install nfs-kernel-server nfs-common portmap

2. จากนั้นเข้าไปแก้ไข portmap เพื่อไม่ให้ทำการ bind ไปที่ loopback IP

$ sudo dpkg-reconfigure portmap

เมื่อพิมพ์คำสั่งข้างต้นจะปรากฏหน้าจอขึ้นมา ให้เลือก “No”

3. เริ่มการทำงานของ portmap ใหม่เพื่อให้ค่าที่แก้ไขไปนั้นถูกนำไปใช้งาน

$ sudo /etc/init.d/portmap restart

4. สร้าง folder ขึ้นมาใหม่เพื่อให้เครื่อง 2 สามารถเข้าถึงไฟล์ในเครื่องนี้ได้ ในที่นี้ใช้ชื่อว่า “NFS”

$ mkdir NFS

5. เปลี่ยน permission folder NFS ให้เครื่อง2 สามารถเข้าถึงและแก้ไขไฟล์ได้

$ chmod 777 /home/pajuad/NFS/

6. เข้าไปแก้ไขไฟล์ export เพื่อระบุไอพีเครื่อง 2 ให้สามารถเข้าไฟล์ในเครื่องนี้ได้

$ sudo nano /etc/exports

แก้ไขไฟล์ exports โดยเพิ่มข้อความด้านล่างนี้ไว้ท้ายสุดของไฟล์

/home/pajuad/NFS 10.150.76.0/255.255.255.0(rw,sync,no_subtree_check,no_root_squash)

Note:

/home/pajuad/NFS                             ที่อยู่ของไฟล์ที่อนุญาตให้เข้าถึง

10.150.76.0/255.255.255.0             IP เครื่องที่อนุญาตให้เข้าถึงกล่าวคือตั้งแต่ IP 10.150.76.0 -10.150.76.254

rw                                                           อนุญาตให้มีการ read/write

sync                                                        ให้เขียนไฟล์ลงดิสก์สำเร็จก่อนแล้วค่อยรายงานผล

no_root_squash                                   กำหนดให้ถ้า root เข้ามาใช้ไฟล์ก็มีสิทธิ์เป็น root

7. ประกาศ share โดยใช้คำสั่ง

$ sudo exportfs  -r

8. เริ่มการทำงานของ NFS Server ใหม่

$ sudo /etc/init.d/nfs-kernel-server restart

การตั้งค่าที่เครื่อง 2

1. เริ่มแรกต้องทำการติดตั้ง package ของ NFS client ที่เครื่องนี้เพื่อให้สามารถเข้าถึงไฟล์ที่จะใช้ในการ migration ได้

$ sudo apt-get install nfs-client nfs-common portmap

2. สร้าง folder ขึ้นมาใหม่เพื่อใช้ในการ mount เข้ากับ folder NFS ที่เครื่องแรก ในที่นี้ใช้ชื่อว่า “mount”

$ mkdir mount

5. เปลี่ยน permission folder mount

$ chmod 777 /home/pajuad/mount/

6. ทำการ mount folder “NFS” เข้ากับ folder “mount” โดยระบุ IP และ folder ของเครื่องปลายทางเข้ากับ folder ที่ต้องการจะ mount

$ sudo mount 10.150.76.154:/home/pajuad/NFS /home/pajuad/mount

หากการ mount ประสบความสำเร็จเราจะเห็นว่า folder “NFS” ที่เครื่อง 1 ถูก mount เข้ากับ folder “mount” และสามารถเข้าถึงไฟล์ในเครื่อง 1(folder NFS) ผ่านทาง folder mount ที่เครื่อง 2 ได้

ขั้นตอนการ Migration

1. สั่งให้เครื่อง 1 เริ่มการทำงานและหยุดรอเพื่อทำการ migrate

$ kvm -name DESTINATION -hda /home/pajuad/kvm/dst_dsl.img -boot c -net nic -net user -incoming tcp:0:1234

2. สั่งให้เครื่องต้นทางเริ่มการทำงานจนกระทั่งพร้อมสำหรับการ migrate

$ kvm -name SOURCE -hda /home/pajuad/kvm/src_dsl.img -boot c -net nic -net user

3. ให้ทำการเปลี่ยนหน้าจอเพื่อเข้าสู่ Command Mode เพื่อทำการ Migrate โดยใช้คำสั่ง ‘Ctrl+Alt+2′

4. จากนั้นทำการ migrate ตามปรกติแต่ต้องระบุ IP ของเครื่อง 1 ที่จะ migrate ไป พร้อมทั้ง port ที่ kvm ของเครื่อง 1 ที่รันอยู่

migrate -d tcp:10.150.76.154:1234

5. สุดท้ายจะได้ผลลัพธ์ของการทำ migration เช่นเดียวกับการทำ migration บนเครื่องเดียวกัน

Après 6 mois d’attente, Red Hat livre enfin la première brique de sa stratégie de virtualisation en dévoilant cette semaine, à l’occasion du salon VMworld 09 qui s’est tenu à San Francisco, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.4, intégrant les extensions de l’hyperviseur open source KVM. “Notre architecture est radicalement différente de celle des autres acteurs du monde de la virtualisation comme Microsoft, VMware ou Xen, puisque KVM n’est pas un nouveau noyau crée de toute pièce, mais simplement des extensions du système d’exploitation Linux”, explique en exclusivité pour Virtuanews, Navin Thadani, le directeur de la virtualisation chez Red Hat.

KVM est intégré au noyau Linux

Selon lui, le premier avantage de cette architecture est de pouvoir réutiliser tous les pilotes, les agents d’administration, les certifications et améliorations du système d’exploitation (dans ce cas Linux), alors que pour toutes les autres solutions concurrentes, il est nécessaire de commencer depuis zéro. “Pourquoi recrée la roue, alors que tout est déjà fait, et a eu le temps de mûrir pendant plus de 10 ans”, ajoute t’il. Contrairement à vSphere, une machine virtuelle KVM gère jusqu’à 16 processeurs virtuels, contre seulement 4 pour l’offre de VMware. L’autre avantage de l’offre Linux de Red Hat est de fonctionner en mode dit “hybride”. “Et nous sommes les seuls à pouvoir le faire. Les mêmes serveurs et stations de travail utilises pour faire tourner les applications d’entreprise, sont aussi capables d’executer à la volée des machines virtuelles en parallèle. Ce qui intéresse notamment nos clients qui voudraient réutiliser leur parc de stations de travail, inutilisées après les heures de travail ou le week-end, et les ajouter au pool de machines virtuelles disponibles”, précise Thadani. Les trois autres briques de la stratégie de virtualisation de Red Hat – KVM (standalone) et les consoles d’administration pour serveurs et postes de travail -, en béta depuis juin pour certains de leurs très gros clients, ne seront pas disponibles avant la fin de l’année, ainsi que leur tarification.

Propos recueillis par correspondant à San Francisco, Jean-Baptiste Su

Source : ZDNet

A propos de la solution TooFAX® :

TooFAX® est une solution moderne et innovante de Fax dématérialisé, vous permettant l’envoi, la réception, et la sauvegarde de Fax par Internet et ou par e-mail. Depuis votre ordinateur de bureau ou portable, votre PDA, etc, TooFAX® vous permet de faxer par mail sur les 5 continents.

TooFAX® est la synthèse entre les atouts du Fax (rapidité, valeur juridique) et l’aspect pratique de l’e-mail.

- Site internet : http://www.toofax.com

- Site du service : http://www.service.toofax.com

- Vidéos de démonstration : http://www.video.toofax.com

- Groupe Facebook : http://www.facebook.com/toofax

- Club des utilisateurs de la solution : http://www.club.toofax.com

- Actualités en ligne des services TooFAX® :  http://twitter.com/toofax

- Blog  officiel de la gamme de services TooFAX® : http://toofax.wordpress.com/

- Base de données gratuite de n° de fax pour vos opérations de faxing : http://www.toofaxdata.com

Après 6 mois d’attente, Red Hat livre enfin la première brique de sa stratégie de virtualisation en dévoilant cette semaine, à l’occasion du salon VMworld 09 qui s’est tenu à San Francisco, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.4, intégrant les extensions de l’hyperviseur open source KVM.

“Notre architecture est radicalement différente de celle des autres acteurs du monde de la virtualisation comme Microsoft, VMware ou Xen, puisque KVM n’est pas un nouveau noyau crée de toute pièce, mais simplement des extensions du système d’exploitation Linux”, explique en exclusivité pour Virtuanews, Navin Thadani, le directeur de la virtualisation chez Red Hat.

KVM est intégré au noyau Linux

Selon lui, le premier avantage de cette architecture est de pouvoir réutiliser tous les pilotes, les agents d’administration, les certifications et améliorations du système d’exploitation (dans ce cas Linux), alors que pour toutes les autres solutions concurrentes, il est nécessaire de commencer depuis zéro. “Pourquoi recrée la roue, alors que tout est déjà fait, et a eu le temps de mûrir pendant plus de 10 ans”, ajoute t’il.

Contrairement à vSphere, une machine virtuelle KVM gère jusqu’à 16 processeurs virtuels, contre seulement 4 pour l’offre de VMware.

L’autre avantage de l’offre Linux de Red Hat est de fonctionner en mode dit “hybride”. “Et nous sommes les seuls à pouvoir le faire. Les mêmes serveurs et stations de travail utilises pour faire tourner les applications d’entreprise, sont aussi capables d’executer à la volée des machines virtuelles en parallèle. Ce qui intéresse notamment nos clients qui voudraient réutiliser leur parc de stations de travail, inutilisées après les heures de travail ou le week-end, et les ajouter au pool de machines virtuelles disponibles”, précise Thadani.

Les trois autres briques de la stratégie de virtualisation de Red Hat – KVM (standalone) et les consoles d’administration pour serveurs et postes de travail -, en béta depuis juin pour certains de leurs très gros clients, ne seront pas disponibles avant la fin de l’année, ainsi que leur tarification.

de notre correspondant à San Francisco, Jean-Baptiste Su

I am listing here some of the virtualization tools used in Linux .

1. User Mode Linux (UML) – http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net
2. Qemu – http://www.qemu.org
3. KVM – http://www.linux-kvm.or
4. Bochs – http://bochs.sourceforge.net
5. CoLinux – http://www.colinux.org
6. VirtualBox – http://www.virtualbox.org
7. VMware – http://www.vmware.com
8. GXemul – http://gxemul.sourceforge.net
9. OpenVZ – http://wiki.openvz.org/Main_Page
10. Skyeye – http://skyeye.sourceforge.net
11. Xen -  https://www.xen.org
12. Virtual PC – http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtual-pc/
13. OVP – http://www.ovpworld.org/index.php

News that paravirtual drivers for Windows on KVM have been released by Red Hat isn’t, and shouldn’t be a big deal.

In the virtualization wars, it is clear that every hypervisor will strive to support Windows and Linux guest operating systems at the very least. Yes, it was news when Microsoft added drivers to the Linux kernel to help Windows Hyper-V better manage Linux guest operating systems. But this was more about the GPL code contribution and the following controversy.

Second, it doesn’t look like the KVM drivers for Windows are ready for prime time. Even the original blog post from Hadyn Solomon states:

“Paravirtual block drivers for windows has been very low key and known to be unstable.”

He goes on to ask:

“With Redhat expecting to release it’s Enterprise 5.4 version in September , maybe they’ve got windows paravirtual block drivers in working order?”

Who wants to bet that the stability, or lack thereof, of the Windows drivers is the reason that Red Hat has been “low key” about the work? There is virtually no way that Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.4, due out in September, will have working, enterprise ready Windows paravirtual block drivers. Will that change in the future? Absolutely. Will it be news then? Sure, because it’ll mean that Red Hat isn’t happy to just be a guest in a Windows world.  Fight! Fight! Fight!

Follow me on twitter at: SavioRodrigues

PS: I should state: “The postings on this site are my own and don’t necessarily represent IBM’s positions, strategies or opinions.”