Skip to main content

Is Microsoft's Hyper-V worth the wait?

Not all hypervisors are created equal, however, and experts say the key to Hyper-V adoption will depend more on the perceived balance between price, features, management and performance.

The first release of Hyper-V will not have some of the capabilities Microsoft originally planned to offer. For instance, it will not provide live migration or the ability to hot-add resources, while support will be limited to 16 cores, or four quad-core processors.

Martin Niemer, VMware senior product marketing manager, doubted if VMware customers are likely to switch to any hypervisor that offers less advanced features than they already have with VMware products.

“Customers are smart enough to see what they are getting for their money. There are already several strains of hypervisor out there, but they miss some important features, like reliability, high availability, dynamic resource scheduling and all the management bits around those,” Niemer said. “It is about advanced functionality and management, like being able to move VMs around and manage virtual infrastructure environments ­ that’s where the differentiators will be.”

For the moment, Microsoft is insisting that Hyper-V environments should be managed by its Systems Center server management suite. But Hall does not rule out the possibility of other software companies building management ecosystems around Hyper-V in the future.

“It would be nice if Systems Center also lets you do the hardware environment, the guest OSs and the virtualisation environment all from the same interface. It resonates quite well with customers who would otherwise need separate applications to manage the hardware, the OS and the virtualisation environment, but never the twain shall meet,” he said.

Vendors are also busy claiming that their respective hypervisors have been optimised to run specific applications, usually their own, more efficiently than rival products.
Oracle, for instance, said that its database software ran up to three times faster on its new Oracle VM Server product, released last month, compared with the leading server virtualisation product.


Link
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Security: VMware Workstation 6 vulnerability

vulnerable software: VMware Workstation 6.0 for Windows, possible some other VMware products as well type of vulnerability: DoS, potential privilege escalation I found a vulnerability in VMware Workstation 6.0 which allows an unprivileged user in the host OS to crash the system and potentially run arbitrary code with kernel privileges. The issue is in the vmstor-60 driver, which is supposed to mount VMware images within the host OS. When sending the IOCTL code FsSetVoleInformation with subcode FsSetFileInformation with a large buffer and underreporting its size to at max 1024 bytes, it will underrun and potentially execute arbitrary code. Security focus
Post a Comment
Read more

OS Virtualization comparison: Parallels' Virtuozzo vs the rest

Virtuozzo's main differentiators versus hypervisors center on overhead, virtualization flexibility, administration and cost. Virtuozzo requires significantly less overhead than hypervisor solutions, generally in the range of 1% to 5% compared with 7% to 25% for most hypervisors, leaving more of the system available to run user workloads. Customers can also virtualize a wider range of applications using Virtuozzo, including transactional databases, which often suffer from performance problems when used with hypervisors. On the administration side, customers need to manage, maintain and secure just a single OS instance, while the hypervisor model requires customers to manage many OS instances. Of course, the hypervisor vendors have worked hard to automate much of this process, but it still requires more effort to manage and maintain multiple operating systems than a single instance. Finally, OS virtualization with Virtuozzo has a lower list price than the leading hypervisor for comme...
Post a Comment
Read more