VPS vs. Virtualization

[Replies] [Reply] [View by Thread] [Help]
[Back To Operating System Issues]

Gamma Cpt Goatrider

VPS's are a completely different animal than real virtualization...

With virtualization, you're actually building a quasi-physical box inside your existing computer. It gets its own allocation of ram, CPU, Hard drive space, and network interfaces.

With a normal VPS, the system seems like a real box, but it's actually just a jailed OS running inside a master OS. There's no pseudo-hardware-abstraction layer, and ALL the hosts share ALL the RAM.

4GB of ram is MORE than enough to run a few virtual machines...I have no more than a gig in each of my virtual machine hosts, and that gives windows 512 MB to play with, and 512MB is left to be divided amongst the machines I put on there. Thankfully, with linux that doesnt run a GUI, you'd be surprised how little ram some of the "boxes" you'll make are going to need.

For example, I made a virtual machine as a router for my house, and it's running ubuntu server, and only using 64MB of ram. It takes forever to boot, but once it's on, it runs as fast (or faster) than any other router I use.

Also, keep in mind, that if you want to compartmentalize your daemons, you could even devote an entire minimal virtual machine for say, a web server, one for samba, one for DB, and one for mail. Since the system is dedicated to only one daemon, it doesn't need as much ram as a normal system that does more than serve one purpose.

It's worth a venture, and like I said...4GB should be enough to have a BUNCH of virtual machines. Hell, if I were running a samba server (if kept by itself, with just that and openldap), I'd only throw a MAX of 512MB of ram at it. Even that would be overkill, even with 30-40 machines accessing it.

--goat

Replies:

Lab Setup... - Beta Ker knoledgesponge 2008-07-22 13:38:36
- RE: Lab Setup... - Gamma Cpt Icydemon 2008-07-23 00:27:03
- RE: Lab Setup... - Gamma Cpt Goatrider 2008-07-23 00:20:30
  - Virtualization? - Beta Ker knoledgesponge 2008-07-23 05:58:31
    - >VPS vs. Virtualization - Gamma Cpt Goatrider 2008-07-23 12:20:34 <
- The distribution is flexible - Beta Ker knoledgesponge 2008-07-22 13:42:58

Guest:
Subject:
Message:	On 2008-07-23 12:20:34, Goatrider wrote >VPS's are a completely different animal than real virtualization... > >With virtualization, you're actually building a quasi-physical box inside your existing computer. It gets its own allocation of ram, CPU, Hard drive space, and network interfaces. > >With a normal VPS, the system seems like a real box, but it's actually just a jailed OS running inside a master OS. There's no pseudo-hardware-abstraction layer, and ALL the hosts share ALL the RAM. > >4GB of ram is MORE than enough to run a few virtual machines...I have no more than a gig in each of my virtual machine hosts, and that gives windows 512 MB to play with, and 512MB is left to be divided amongst the machines I put on there. Thankfully, with linux that doesnt run a GUI, you'd be surprised how little ram some of the "boxes" you'll make are going to need. > >For example, I made a virtual machine as a router for my house, and it's running ubuntu server, and only using 64MB of ram. It takes forever to boot, but once it's on, it runs as fast (or faster) than any other router I use. > >Also, keep in mind, that if you want to compartmentalize your daemons, you could even devote an entire minimal virtual machine for say, a web server, one for samba, one for DB, and one for mail. Since the system is dedicated to only one daemon, it doesn't need as much ram as a normal system that does more than serve one purpose. > >It's worth a venture, and like I said...4GB should be enough to have a BUNCH of virtual machines. Hell, if I were running a samba server (if kept by itself, with just that and openldap), I'd only throw a MAX of 512MB of ram at it. Even that would be overkill, even with 30-40 machines accessing it. > >--goat
Signature:
Optional Image Link:
http://

CyberArmy::Forum v0.6
Generated In 0.00724 seconds