[ale] Mass Machine Virtualization w/ Remote GUI Access

[Jeff Hubbs]

Jim -

I've been reading up on Xen - how would CPU affinity be accomplished for 
multiple instances of Xen?

- Jeff

James P. Kinney III wrote:

>On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 15:27 -0500, Jeff Hubbs wrote:
>  
>
>>The 8-CPU mobo might be overdoing it but maybe not 4...
>>
>>Regarding Stephen A. DuChene's comment "We have found that even using a 
>>big server system with multiple GB of memory there is still a practical 
>>limit of around 4 - 8 people who can run VMware sessions off of a remote 
>>server," I wonder if that is caused by a RAM I/O bottleneck that the 
>>RAM-affinity of those boards can help get around.  That is to say, does 
>>it raise that limit or at least "soften the knee" if you're using these 
>>new Opteron boards?  Or, do I just have to buy one to find out? ;)
>>
>>Jeff
>>
>>    
>>
>
>The IO bottleneck you run into is network bandwidth. Those Tyan boards
>are some serious monsters and should be the best things out that can
>handle the load. Run Xen on each physical CPU and ESX on each Xen
>virtual machine to partition off the server from itself.
>
>And add some extra AC for the server :)
>
>  
>
>>Joe Knapka wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Jeff Hubbs wrote:
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>I've got a situation where a number of users on a development shop LAN 
>>>>are in a bad way because they're trying to run a number of different 
>>>>Win2K3 Server virtual machines - done up in Microsoft Virtual PC - on 
>>>>their desktops.  This has come to result in people trying to pull and 
>>>>push around 4-6GB of MSVPC files on the LAN, and, of course, anyone who 
>>>>wants to actually run an instance on MSVPC has to have scads of RAM and 
>>>>this is often incompatible with various people's desktops and laptops 
>>>>who may be running "only" 512MB, tops. 
>>>>
>>>>My way of addressing this would be to use VMware instead of MSVPC, 
>>>>running it on an "uberserver" capable of  holding and running numerous 
>>>>virtual machines at once, such that various people can connect to the 
>>>>virtual machines at the display level from their own WinXP desktops and 
>>>>laptops. 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Ooh, this sounds like a perfect opportunity to go out and buy some of those
>>>Tyan 8-CPU mobos we were discussing last week!
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>It's that last part that I have a question about.  Given that it would 
>>>>be nice if more than one person could actually connect remotely to any 
>>>>one of these virtual machines (i.e., fighting over mouse/keyboard if so 
>>>>inclined), how to best cover the remote access?
>>>>
>>>>Ways I'm aware of include Xorg+Cygwin, a commercial X Server for 
>>>>Windows, VNC, or MS Terminal Services. [NOTE:  I assume that all but the 
>>>>last would take place over OpenSSH].
>>>>
>>>>What do you think?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Micro$haft wants you to pay for every terminal server connection, and if 
>>>you run out,
>>>you can't log into the machine at all, which is very annoying and seems 
>>>to happen
>>>all the freakin' time. All of our machines have VNC installed, so that 
>>>we can get to
>>>the machines even when folks have forgotten to log out the
>>>two or three Remote Desktop sessions we're allowed on each one. I'd 
>>>probably go with
>>>VNC and see how that works. You might give RealVNC some money for their
>>>"enterprise edition" and avoid having to muck about with SSH tunnels.
>>>
>>>-- JK
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Ale mailing list
>>>Ale at ale.org
>>>http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Ale mailing list
>>Ale at ale.org
>>http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>>    
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Ale mailing list
>>Ale at ale.org
>>http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>>