CentOS - Mar 2010 - VMWare vs. KVM - recommendations?

Okay, I'm being noisy today.

I have VMWare Server 1.0.8 installed on my CentOS desktop, and it runs
my XP and CentOS guests just fine, though I don't use them much.

I'm considering moving to either VMWare Server 2.0 or switching to KVM
instead, mainly because VMWS 1 is now obsolete and also because its
limitations on video configurations is really annoying - I have a 22"
1680x1050 LCD monitor, hoping to upgrade sometime in the
not-too-distant future to a 23 or 24" display with full HD
(1920x1080), but VMWS 1 does not support any wide-screen
configurations at all.  I tend to use on-screen real estate to maximum
benefit, and the 1152x864 maximum useful size I have now is just too
small for me, so I'm thinking maybe it's time to upgrade to something
newer/better.

I've seen some of the horror stories about problems with VMWare 2.0,
which is not at all encouraging, and I've taken a look at the Red Hat
Virtualization guides (the 5.4 one that's online in html only) and
also a PDF version for 5.2 that I found somewhere, and it _looks_
complicated.  (One of the main benefits of VMWare Server that I really
liked was that it is fairly easy to use and relatively low
maintenance, if it works, and 1.0.8 works just fine, except for the
screen issue.)  OTOH, the built-in nature of KVM is really appealing,
and if it works as well as other features of CentOS/RH/Linux, it would
be nice to be able to avoid the separate upgrade and
re-build-the-drivers-vmware-config.pl annoyance every time a new
kernel comes along.  I'm a big fan of well-integrated software,
especially in this area (virtualization).

One question I had that overrides most other considerations is how to
transfer my existing XP VM over to whichever new underlying system I
choose - is that even possible, or do I have to go through all the
reinstallation pain yet another time?  If I have to go that route,
I'll probably opt for kvm and take that plunge so I can do it once and
never again (ok, that was not supposed to be funny... :-).

Recommendations?

Thanks, as always.

Mark Hull-Richter
Expert CentOS/Linux C/shell Software Developer
Registered Linux User #472807
- sign up at http://counter.li.org/

MHR wrote:
> Recommendations?
What are you going to use it for? If your looking for something
to act like vmware workstation, e.g. primarily for running a
desktop OS on top of X11 then I would stick to vmware server
2. Or more ideally VMware workstation, it has a TON of
desktop optimization thingies which may be useful if your
running XP as a guest.

I use vmware server 2 on a pair of debian systems(only use
CentOS at work and there I only use ESX as my hypervisor),
without any issues. The system I'm on now uses vmware server
2 to run another copy of debian to use as a VPN client to my
company(the vpn software screws with the routing table). No
issues going to 1080p resolution(running on a 47" phillips
1080p TV). My other vmware server 2 system is running that
because the hardware is too old to run anything better(circa
2004).

No problems..

nate

On Mar 29, 2010, at 10:01 PM, MHR <mhullrich at gmail.com> wrote:
> Okay, I'm being noisy today.
>
> I have VMWare Server 1.0.8 installed on my CentOS desktop, and it runs
> my XP and CentOS guests just fine, though I don't use them much.
>
> I'm considering moving to either VMWare Server 2.0 or switching to KVM
> instead, mainly because VMWS 1 is now obsolete and also because its
> limitations on video configurations is really annoying - I have a 22"
> 1680x1050 LCD monitor, hoping to upgrade sometime in the
> not-too-distant future to a 23 or 24" display with full HD
> (1920x1080), but VMWS 1 does not support any wide-screen
> configurations at all.  I tend to use on-screen real estate to maximum
> benefit, and the 1152x864 maximum useful size I have now is just too
> small for me, so I'm thinking maybe it's time to upgrade to
something
> newer/better.
>
> I've seen some of the horror stories about problems with VMWare 2.0,
> which is not at all encouraging, and I've taken a look at the Red Hat
> Virtualization guides (the 5.4 one that's online in html only) and
> also a PDF version for 5.2 that I found somewhere, and it _looks_
> complicated.  (One of the main benefits of VMWare Server that I really
> liked was that it is fairly easy to use and relatively low
> maintenance, if it works, and 1.0.8 works just fine, except for the
> screen issue.)  OTOH, the built-in nature of KVM is really appealing,
> and if it works as well as other features of CentOS/RH/Linux, it would
> be nice to be able to avoid the separate upgrade and
> re-build-the-drivers-vmware-config.pl annoyance every time a new
> kernel comes along.  I'm a big fan of well-integrated software,
> especially in this area (virtualization).
>
> One question I had that overrides most other considerations is how to
> transfer my existing XP VM over to whichever new underlying system I
> choose - is that even possible, or do I have to go through all the
> reinstallation pain yet another time?  If I have to go that route,
> I'll probably opt for kvm and take that plunge so I can do it once and
> never again (ok, that was not supposed to be funny... :-).
>
> Recommendations?
For simplicity and reliability I'd give virtualbox a try, especially  
if your talking limited # of machines and fancy displays.

-Ross

MHR wrote:
> Okay, I'm being noisy today.
> 
> I have VMWare Server 1.0.8 installed on my CentOS desktop, and it runs
> my XP and CentOS guests just fine, though I don't use them much.
> 
> I'm considering moving to either VMWare Server 2.0 or switching to KVM
> instead, mainly because VMWS 1 is now obsolete and also because its
> limitations on video configurations is really annoying - I have a 22"
> 1680x1050 LCD monitor, hoping to upgrade sometime in the
> not-too-distant future to a 23 or 24" display with full HD
> (1920x1080), but VMWS 1 does not support any wide-screen
> configurations at all.  I tend to use on-screen real estate to maximum
> benefit, and the 1152x864 maximum useful size I have now is just too
> small for me, so I'm thinking maybe it's time to upgrade to
something
> newer/better.
If you don't use it often and mostly access it locally, consider VMware
player
instead of server.  (You might need to install server to create new images).

If you use VM guests a lot and have access to a windows box to run the control 
console, load ESXi on the hardware and run everything as guests.
> One question I had that overrides most other considerations is how to
> transfer my existing XP VM over to whichever new underlying system I
> choose - is that even possible, or do I have to go through all the
> reinstallation pain yet another time?
The images are fairly portable.  Just copy the directory containing the files. 
Or install something else to run them.  ESXi is an exception because you
don't
have normal access to the filesystem - but the vCenter Converter is a free 
download and will convert about anything to anything else (I think you need 
windows for that too, but it could run under an existing VM if it can see the 
image files for the others).

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com

MHR writes:
> Okay, I'm being noisy today.
> 
> I have VMWare Server 1.0.8 installed on my CentOS desktop, and it runs
> my XP and CentOS guests just fine, though I don't use them much.
[...]

 VirtualBox is pretty good, but if you need USB support, it's not exactly
 plug&play. Even in the non-OSE version, you need to enable the device
 explicitly in the Devices menu before the host sees it; in the OSE edition,
 you may be able to use a USB device through a shared folder, but I haven't
 tried it. The good thing is that VirtualBox works on processors without
 virtualisation features. Kernel updates require rebuilding the vbox modules,
 which is elegantly solved (IMHO :) by integrating it into the RC script
 (service vbdrv setup).

 I've only recently started playing with KVM and am surprised how slow it
 is. USB support isn't plug&play either, one needs to lsusb and specify
the
 device by id on startip, and supported screen resolutions depend on which
 gfx hw is emulated. Also, it needs virtualisation support in the cpu. I would
 personally not recommend it for a desktop OS (i.e. to put Windows capabilities
 on the desktop), but it's probably fine for headless Linux servers.

 I'd consider VMware player what you describe as well-integrated software,
 so that's another alternative. No idea about supported screen resolutions,
 but I found under kvm that the "-vga standard" option offered a wider
 range than "-vga vmware"; the latter required installation of the
vmware
 gfx drivers that are part of vmware tools.

 Moving VMs is an interesting exercise. While the image formats seems to
 be mostly compatible or convertable, the Windows installation is probably
 not. When I moved from vmware player to VirtualBox at home, I was unable
 to get the Windows image to work because of driver issues. Windows doesn't
 seem to have the nice modularisation and a given install is tied to the
 particular hardware it's installed on. It may be possible to work around
 that with some patience.



---------------------------------------------------------------
This message and any attachments may contain Cypress (or its
subsidiaries) confidential information. If it has been received
in error, please advise the sender and immediately delete this
message.
---------------------------------------------------------------