Comments on: Is Xen ready for the data center? Is that the right question?

By: Nancy

Nancy — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 13:42:38 +0000

I’m a believer in change, especially when it comes to technology. Though technology naturally evolves and gets better and more efficient with time the changes can sometimes be frustrating. Over the last few years we’ve seen network automation become more and more relevant in the workplace which has really helped to improve application availability for companies’ respective networks. That said it is frustrating to see change when it involves a degradation of the tools we use or are made available to us. I have been witness to the implementation of a new set of automation tools within my own network and these tools are severely outdated, even when compared to our former set of automaton solutions. In this way change in technology is frustrating because the sea of garbage floating around out there makes it difficult for even experienced IT pro’s to find a good set of database tools to help manage their networks.

By: Aron Spegon

Aron Spegon — Sun, 23 Sep 2007 07:00:07 +0000

Hey there everyone! Though I have a strong IT background and have been in the IT service industry for several years when I came to work here with my new company I knew very little about network automation. Of course I’d heard tid bits here and there when people would talk about ITIL automation and trying to get their networks to process workflow better. Data center automation has and will continue to change the way IT is handled and planned for. I was really and pleasantly surprised when I found out that automation helped greatly to improve application availability and give the people in the department time to get more done. Of course I’ve been playing a lot of catch up because most of the people I work with have been with the company many years and so they are quite familiar with database administration and automation. Kind of a culture shock at first but a good one.

By: Jim Klein

Jim Klein — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 16:35:43 +0000

I totally agree with both points. The hypervisor will certainly become a commodity – one could argue that it already has with paravirt_ops. Paravirt_ops is largely Xen based, and, according to Xensource, will be the foundation for the next release. The point I’m trying to stress is that the software industry is rallying around a Xen compatible paravirt model and, while I agree that the best tools will survive long term, the decision making process in the near term should be based on the technology that has the most long term viability. “Brand X is safe” should not be the deciding factor when developing a virtualization strategy.

As for the comment about bias, I believe I am being objective here. I think I made the point rather clearly that I believe Microsoft is heading in the right direction with their virtualization technology. My prior comment was simply an effort to stress that I am not a Microsoft fanboy, as was asserted earlier.

By: Masimo Re Ferre'

Masimo Re Ferre' — Sun, 29 Jul 2007 20:55:47 +0000

Jim,

I agree that it depends on your definition of hypervisor. Most people however would agree with the wikipedia definition of hypervisor here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypervisor
… where I don’t see any reference to “cooperative software that interacts directly with a guest operating system”.

But this is an academic discussion in my opinion. It is not esx being or not being an hypervisor that ultimately will determine its success or its failure.

I think that you miss two points in your analysis though:

1) long term it will not be the hypervisor the real game but the tools around it (with most functionalities draining into the cpu’s and systems the hypervisor will be commoditized soon so it’s those with the best tools that will survive).

2) your paravirtualization analysis is pretty much correct but you seem to assume that no paravirtualization standardization will take place. This has actually already happened in the Linux space with things like “paravirt_ops” etc etc (i.e. single kernel image to run on physical, vmware, xen etc etc). We still don’t know what we are going to see in the Windows space …. certainly MS will have to find a compromise between looking good in front of the DOJ and fighting VMware …..

Massimo.

By: David Hutchison

David Hutchison — Sun, 29 Jul 2007 15:46:30 +0000

When portraying yourself as an expert and posting information for the world to see, this information would be much more meaningful if your took an objective stance. By your own admission, you are not a Microsoft fan, thus anything you state will now be taken with a grain of salt except for those who agree with your “perspective”.

If you really want to help peole make a decision, give them all the facts. If Xen is truly king of the hill, the facts will support your claims. Just like “no one ever got fired for buying IBM”, VMWare is the safe, defacto standard for most Windows environments. FYI – I do appreciate and read your postings.

Sincerely,

David Hutchison
http://www.excipio.net

By: Jim Klein

Jim Klein — Wed, 25 Jul 2007 06:55:16 +0000

If you research any of my other posts or articles, you will definitely come to the conclusion that I am not a Microsoft fan. As for the hypervisor issue, I suppose it depends on your definition of hypervisor. If you define it simply as software that sits underneath a guest operating system, then you are right – VMWare can be considered a hypervisor. If, on the other hand, you define it as cooperative software that interacts directly with a guest operating system, then VMWare’s trap and patch binary translation layer simply doesn’t match up. The key distinction is that the hypervisor and guest are aware of each other’s presence and are optimized to work cooperatively.

Don’t get me wrong, VMWare is great software. But they have a distinct problem – OS vendors aren’t writing code to support them, which means that the VMWare has to do it all themselves. Long term, they will have a hard time keeping up with the OS vendors, who are going in a different direction.

By: Jose R

Jose R — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:32:25 +0000

It sounds like you do not like VMware (whatever reason). The point is VMware ESX really is a Hypervisor (no matter what they say?, have you heard ESX Lite?)

try not to become a microsoft representative (sounds like someone here is spreading FUD).

best regards

Jose R

By: Jim Klein

Jim Klein — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:19:45 +0000

I’m not suggesting in some way that Xen doesn’t virtualize Windows well – I know that is not the case. The point I’m trying to make is that the whole system, not just basic I/O, could be even faster and more scalable once the OS is aware that it is being virtualized and has been optimized to run in that environment. There is still a lot of blocking and trapping going on, which would be eliminated.

By: Simon Crosby

Simon Crosby — Tue, 24 Jul 2007 10:07:49 +0000

Great article, but Xen for Windows is a solved problem. You forget that our ability to get very high performance for Windows on VT, with PV I/O, gives us equivalent performance or better than VMware.

I’d recommend you try the XenSource 4.0 beta. We have better support for Windows than VMware does.

Simon Crosby