OT: Coolest thing... SCO on 2003 server!

[Silas Martinez]

I'm assuming this is a lot like VMWare, or the like?

On 8/24/05, John Esak <john at valar.com> wrote:
> 
> > > Okay, I'm going to assume I'm only talking to people who care.
> > :-) Rick did
> > > the coolest thing for me recently. He set up virtual pc for me
> > on my 2003
> >
> > My question is this: Is the Virtual PC card-based (like the old PC board
> > for Macs, and the X-Box devsys board for PC's) or sofware-only?
> >
> 
> It is just software.


Assuming its something like VMWare, then yes. The problem with that system 
is.... It is sharing all system resources with the host system. Its like 
running Unix with all the headroom of windows bogging down the system - in 
addition to the virtual guest OS. Furthermore, running a host system of 
windows means you lose the stability of the the guest system. For me, this 
is an issue - I run *nix servers (not SCO - I tend towards a mix of linux 
and bsd variants - but it's all the same in regards to this) for the 
stability - for knowing that a software update or even a simple network 
setting change will never require me to restart the system. For knowing that 
it is less susceptable to virii, that a runaway process stands a 
slim-to-none chance of crashing my box. For the security inherent in the 
*nix based systems. Running in a virtual machine, you give all that up.

> Assuming software-only, is it actually running the entire system, or is it
> > running the binaries under emulation.
> 
> Currently, it is a black art to me. I have no idea how in the hell it can
> run all the things SCO has going for it, when it is just ONE file on the
> system! You'd think a zillion binaries would have to be running all the
> time... extracted from this file as needed. Unbelievable.



Essentially (again, assuming this is something like the virtual machine 
systems I have experience with) the data file(s) represent partitions for 
the virtual machine. The VM software emulates a virtual bios/etc, and 
provides access to input/output devices as required. It only appears to 
windows as one running process, although typically it will also install some 
network drivers, which give the guest OS access to network devices (which 
can, in typical situations, be configured in several different ways. One 
would be to see the host OS as a gateway, meaning the virtual machine is 
essentually nat'ed behind a gateway on the host OS. It can also be 
configured to have separate access to the network adaptor, essentially 
letting it appear to the network as its own system.

>
> > Assuming it's running the entire system, how's the speed? It's still
> > through some sort of emulation, so what does the performance loss "feel"
> > like. I'm not one of the performance extremists that demands a 
> picosecond
> > benchmark set--I just want to know if it "feels" 95%, 75%, 50%,
> > whatever...
> 
> It runs as fast or faster than any SCO system I have ever seen. There is
> zero performance problem. It just goes as fast as I have ever seen things
> go. I did an Edge backup through ftp to my old SCO box across the 10/100
> network and this took WAY more time than a regular backup to tape, but I
> would expect it to... I'll be getting a fast tape drive for the system
> soson. I decided to put the jukebox somewhere at Nexus.


Performance isn't typically dog slow, but remember - you are running your 
virtual OS on hardware shared with a windows installation. There *will* be a 
significant load on the resources of your virtual machine, and a virtual 
machine in the scenario we're discussing will *always* run slower than a 
native installation on the same hardware.

>
> > Given all that, can I assume it would run Linux just as easily?
> >
> Without any doubt. I think Rick runs some Linux or another... SuSe I think
> on his box in this way.


Thats correct. Most Virtual Machine applications can support almost any 
guest OS - windows, linux, bsd, SCO, Sloraris, bob's random OS - you get the 
picture. 

> > old SCO system there. I can now lose one entire machine, one
> > keyboard, one
> > > source of noise and heat, one system that needs backing up
> > every night. I
> > > save the space and the noise, but there are so many benefits besides. 
> It
> >
> > I collect old systems. :) J/K
> >
> 
> Remember that fork, Mark. You're done... :-)
> 
> 
> > Now the question I have is, how much access does it give you to Windows
> > while it runs the virtual system? Can you minimise the Virtual PC to
> > systray and let it run as a service unless you otherwise need to
> > access it,
> 
> Yes, goes minimized and keeps on ticking without any problems. And I'm
> experimenting with the access both ways. It allows you to assign the
> devices, say F: to be the DVD-R and it accesses the physical floppy, etc.
> You can arrange the mouse to work on both systems in the same way... I 
> think
> there is a clipboard too!


Different virtual machines (there are many - VMWare and the open source 
bochs are the two I know best, but there are tons out there) support 
different forms of minimization - minimize to systray is likely an option, 
and I would imagine that one of them must support running as a straight 
service on windows.

> or does it commandeer the entire system? I wouldn't say it'd be pointless
> > to not be able to, as it'd be handy to just fire up linux for some 
> things
> > and not have to reboot all the time. However, if you get access to both,
> > how's the priority sharing feel?
> 
> There is an elaborate Settings menu that lets you assign how much priority
> you want the virtual system to have vs. the host system. Lots, not much, a
> reasonable default blend...all the way to shutting down the priority of
> either system to almost nothing...
> 
> > Got a URL for this thing? It does sound cool. Tell me it'd work under
> > Windows 2000 Pro, not just 2003 or XP-SP2. :)
> >
> > mark->
> 
> Will post a URL later... once I find one. :-) Unfortunately, it requires 
> at
> least 2000 server, not 2000 pro. Sorry. I believe it took getting SCO 6 to
> make it work... but I think most any Linux would work without hassle.
> 
> John


There are many virtual machine systems out there. Google would likely turn 
up any number of useful results. Additionally, there are many versions of 
this sort of software that run on differnt host systems - I run virtual 
machines with linux as the host system, and windows as the guest OS. This 
allows me a good place to test questionable applications, see the effects of 
a virus in an easily rolled back sandbox, and have several versions of 
windows at my fingertips. For some of my users running linux day-to-day, it 
gives them access to what limited windows applications I have to support 
that I can't get to run under Wine or the like - and also means that they 
can't cause problems that users are prone to causing on windows (at least, 
my users are prone to causing problems) because a rollback is only a click 
away..
Bear in mind, there are also interesting ways of virtualizing system 
resources that involve signicantly less system load - the linux virtual 
server project (http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/) is a good example. These 
offer less flexibility (typically, you are restricted to virtual copies of 
the same OS) but they vastly reduce the overhead of running guest systems, 
and still offer an excellent way to run applications in a sandbox, without 
having to grant the application(s) any access to the host system. Kind of 
like running an entire OS in a chroot jail.

Virtual machines are useful - but personally, I would never willingly nor 
happily run a production server in a standard virtual machine in the 
configuration you mention - in large part because of the concerns with 
making a more secure/stable *nix susceptable to the foibles and frailities 
of the windows host system. I've considered the linux virtual server style 
of applications for some things, but ultimately couldn't convince myself 
that the security gain was worth the performance hit - or I find a more 
elegant way to gain the security I was hoping to buy.

-- Silas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.celestial.com/pipermail/filepro-list/attachments/20050825/146fee8f/attachment.html