Virtualized FreeBSD?

Virtualized FreeBSD?

Post by Editorial_ » Mon, 08 Dec 2008 06:49:50


Hi,

Has anyone had any luck, good or bad in running FreeBSD on a Intel
Xenon quad core using VMWare ESX or ESXi?

I want to run four to five virtualized FreeBSD systems. The systems
are: one or possibly two systems acting as a firewall, an Apache
webserver, DNS, and mail.

This will be a colo situation where after I build the system it is
hosted at a local ISP.

I am looking at one virtual environment because (1)that is the current
wave for administration is and (2)because the costs at the colo are
per U + bandwidth.


Here is the system I am looking at:
http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ~pedge_2950_3

Looking at a Quad Core IntelXeon5460, 2x6MB Cache, 3.16GHz,
1333MHz FSB, with 16GB to 32GB of 667MHz, Dual Ranked DIMMs, and five
80GB 7.2K RPM Serial ATA 3Gbps 3.5-in HotPlug Hard Drives.
 
 
 

Virtualized FreeBSD?

Post by Helmut Sch » Mon, 08 Dec 2008 20:41:35


I'm running a few machines with 7.x on IBM HS20 with E5420 on ESXi3.5.

Helmut

--
No Swen today, my love has gone away
My mailbox stands for lorn, a symbol of the dawn

 
 
 

Virtualized FreeBSD?

Post by Editorial_ » Tue, 09 Dec 2008 09:20:28


Thanks for the reply!
 
 
 

Virtualized FreeBSD?

Post by Kevin Wilc » Wed, 10 Dec 2008 01:42:48


Yes. I'm running several FreeBSD 7.x instances under VMWare ESX on Dell
2950 hardware. Right now that includes subversion, several dns servers,
postgresql servers and a few webservers.

I've just started playing around with virtualising firewalls so I can't
attest to that.

kmw

--
Linux because I have to
FreeBSD because I want to
OpenBSD because I can
 
 
 

Virtualized FreeBSD?

Post by Michael Fu » Wed, 10 Dec 2008 02:42:04


Can anyone tell me the advantage of using VMWare instead of BSD jails?




I don't like X CPUs, they can get really hot when under load. Perhaps
you should consider using E5450 even if you don't pay for power.

Michael!
 
 
 

Virtualized FreeBSD?

Post by Michael Si » Wed, 10 Dec 2008 03:04:37


I think the question you mean to ask is what's the advantage of
true virtualization (VMware, Xen, etc.) versus jails. Jails are
a poor man's virtual machine, and an older and more cumbersome
technology. Virtualization permits running any hardware compatible
OS, which may not be relevant to your needs. Xen offers nearly
bare iron performance for 64-bit OSes under a 64-bit hypervisor,
similar claims from VMware.
 
 
 

Virtualized FreeBSD?

Post by User » Wed, 10 Dec 2008 03:17:19


In one (very unscientific) test, I saw bad performance for a big compilation
(analogous to "make buildworld") under VmWare server 2.0 when compared to a
native BSD jail : around 4 times slower : 21 minutes vs around 5 in a jail.

I agree with you that using VmWare or Xen allows mixed OS combinations, but
if you can run with just FreeBSD envirnments, jail is difficult to beat
(furthermore, the physical memory -RAM- of the host machine is more easily
shared between jails than between VMs, which have a fixed allocation).

I don't understand how you can find jails "cumbersome" : the management of
VmWare may be graphically more attractive, but I found it quite slow.

One drawback I found for jails is that I could not run a 32-bit jail under a
64-bit kernel : the applications in the 32-bit jail could not be compiled
due to linker errors, and Google did not help.

TfH
 
 
 

Virtualized FreeBSD?

Post by Lowell Gil » Wed, 10 Dec 2008 05:15:00

Michael *** ner < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > writes:



It's not as simple a question as you're probably thinking. They are
both referred to as "virtualization" technologies, but they are really
not very similar, and neither one is in danger of being eliminated by
the other.

VMWare (and similar machine-emulation approaches, like qemu, Xen, Bochs,
etc.) emulate a whole machine, giving much better isolation between the
different instances than you can get from a jail. However, jails use
far fewer resources. As a result, you can host several orders of
magnitude more jails on a given machine than you can with full virtual
machines.

--
Lowell Gilbert, embedded/networking software engineer
http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ~lowell/
 
 
 

Virtualized FreeBSD?

Post by Kevin Wilc » Wed, 10 Dec 2008 05:27:53


Each has their respective strengths and weaknesses.

In *my* case, had I been able to get a few physical machines I could have
used jails because most of what I do runs on FreeBSD. Since the role of
most of what I am doing doesn't justify the cost of additional hardware,
especially since it's mostly minor in-house development and testing,
we carved out hosts from our ESX cluster and I got virtual machines. I'm
willing to accept the potential security risk from the virtualised
environment in exchange for not having to cram another couple of
physical machines in a rack and for letting our Systems folks handle the
HA migrations and backup snapshots.

The original poster would probably be served just as well using jails
unless s/he is unfamiliar with using them, especially given the cost of
VMWare ESX licensing.

kmw

--
Linux because I have to
FreeBSD because I want to
OpenBSD because I can
 
 
 

Virtualized FreeBSD?

Post by Tim Daneli » Wed, 10 Dec 2008 08:41:08


I tried to install ESXi on a clone server of my own construction and
it refused to install ... is it the case that ESXi only installs
on particular, brand name servers, or should it go onto any generic
PC mobo?

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk XXXX@XXXXX.COM
PGP Key: http://www.yqcomputer.com/
 
 
 

Virtualized FreeBSD?

Post by Tim Daneli » Wed, 10 Dec 2008 08:55:23


I was with you until this last sentence. Full virt does chew up some
resources, but "several orders of magnitude"??? OK, I'll admit not
actually testing this, and will defer to any experience you have here,
but an Order Of Magnitude (OOM) is ordinarily understood to mean a
factor of 10x. If this is so we'd get something like this


A Machine Will Run This
Running Many Jails
This Many VMs OOM=1 OOM=2 OOM=3

1 10 100 1000
2 20 200 2000
3 30 300 3000
... And so on


So, is this actually what you meant and have you seen actual instances
of "multiple orders of magnitude" more Jails running on a given machine?

"Ah", you say, "We're doing computer stuff here and an OOM is
in Base 2." OK, then the table looks like this:

A Machine Will Run This
Running Many Jails
This Many VMs OOM=1 OOM=2 OOM=3

1 2 4 8
2 4 8 16
3 6 12 24
... And so on

Somewhat more believable, but my sense is that its still kind
of high.

My virt experience has been with Xen and VMware doing para- and full
virtualization respectively. The overhead for paravirtualization was
a few percent and full virtualization, maybe twice that *per VM instance*.

I'm not being argumentative here, just curious. I realize that the
Jail architecture has vanishingly small overhead, but if it really is
"orders of magnitude" better, I think I better check into it more
deeply.

Regards,
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk XXXX@XXXXX.COM
PGP Key: http://www.yqcomputer.com/
 
 
 

Virtualized FreeBSD?

Post by Editorial_ » Wed, 10 Dec 2008 15:13:44


The only reason I am doing this entire project is to move myself into
the realm of strong system administrator. I've never seen anyone
advertise BSD jails as a preference for employment. But I do see a
lot of VMWare ESX.


Thanks Mike.
 
 
 

Virtualized FreeBSD?

Post by Lowell Gil » Thu, 11 Dec 2008 02:22:18

Tim Daneliuk < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > writes:



There are a lot of factors, but one (memory limited) testbed I built
certainly started hitting swap hard with four or five qemu instances,
while I could run a thousand jails on it. One factor might be the fact
that nearly all of the jails set up identically and were not highly
active (they were clients for a DHCP relay agent I was developing).

I suspect you may be right that most uses won't be quite so contrived to
share memory pages that well, so the ratio I'm describing is probably
close to an upper bound.

I should also note that the qemu environment was a *much* more
convenient place for me to analyze failures, so I didn't end up using
the jail approach much on that project.

--
Lowell Gilbert, embedded/networking software engineer
http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ~lowell/
 
 
 

Virtualized FreeBSD?

Post by Helmut Sch » Thu, 11 Dec 2008 05:19:19


Well, like any other OS (here afaik some flavor of RedHat) not all kind of
hardware is supported.
http://www.yqcomputer.com/

--
No Swen today, my love has gone away
My mailbox stands for lorn, a symbol of the dawn