Agreed. Proxmox is awesome for tiny, clonable instances. I use KVM for
most things, but proxmox for things like tossing up LAMP instances for devs.
On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 9:14 AM, George Toft <
george@georgetoft.com> wrote:
> proxmox rox! Thanks for the tip.
>
> Regards,
>
> George Toft
>
> On 10/31/2012 4:49 PM, JD Austin wrote:
>
> I second the Proxmox VE recommendation; expecially if you use the virtio
> drivers.
> http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/WindowsGuestDrivers/Download_Drivers
> If you must have USB support then go with Virtualbox though.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Eric Shubert <ejs@shubes.net> wrote:
>
>> While I still have a couple hosts running VMWare Server 2.0.2 on CentOS
>> 5.x, I've given up that ship. I think you're walking on thin ice running
>> VMWare Server 2 on just about anything these days, especially Windoze. I
>> doubt you'll find much help solving any problems with Server 2, given that
>> VMWare has dropped it as I expect most users have also by now.
>>
>> I highly recommend running Proxmox VE as a virtualization host platform.
>> It's similar to VMware Server in many ways, but I've found it even easier
>> to use. While it requires a cpu that supports virtualization, that's not so
>> hard to find these days.
>>
>> We're beginning to document the process of building a Tagcose server
>> based on PVE. See http://tagcose.com for details. We meet monthly at UAT
>> (2nd Sat) to work on Tagcose development. You're welcome to join us if
>> you'd like.
>>
>> --
>> -Eric 'shubes'
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/28/2012 01:13 PM, George Toft wrote:
>>
>>> Continuing saga . . .
>>> SMB and FTP from another physical to this virtual run at full speed.
>>> SMB from every Win7 box except this one runs at full speed. The
>>> communications bog down only for SMB/FTP on the physical host to the
>>> VM. Next step is to build a dedicated VMware host. I probably should
>>> have done that to begin with, but was trying to cut down on the number
>>> of physical systems running.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> George Toft
>>>
>>> On 10/28/2012 7:13 AM, Michael Havens wrote:
>>>
>>>> thanks for the update!
>>>> :-)~MIKE~(-:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 10:07 PM, George Toft <george@georgetoft.com
>>>> <mailto:george@georgetoft.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Further investigation shows it's not FTP nor samba. It's Windows
>>>> 7 (which I used for Windows file and FTP). Using smbclient on a
>>>> Linux box I get 19MB/sec and FTP from Linux I get 32MB/sec.
>>>> Concurrent with replacing the old file server was the purchase of
>>>> a new PC. I guess we know what XP does better than Windows 7.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> George Toft
>>>>
>>>> On 10/27/2012 6:01 PM, George Toft wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Spent several hours researching this one - can't find a
>>>> solution. I hope someone here can hit me with a clue-by-four.
>>>>
>>>> CentOS 6.3 64-bit virtual running under VMware 2.0.2 fresh
>>>> install with FTP/Samba/NFS running. I copied 500+GB of data
>>>> from the old computer to the new one using NFS at full network
>>>> speed (11+ MB/sec). Life's good.
>>>>
>>>> Now here it is a day later, and my samba write speed is a
>>>> blazing 80KB/sec (up from 40KB/s when I started
>>>> troubleshooting). I read samba should approach FTP speed and
>>>> I verified it does - FTP writes to the new machine at about
>>>> the same speed. Reads still take place a full speed (now it's
>>>> on a 1Gbps network) - 33MB/sec. Writes . . . 99.8% slower. I
>>>> did not have this problem on the previous samba server (CentOS
>>>> 4.8 32-bit).
>>>>
>>>> I added memory (it now has 1GB RAM, 1 GB swap) and it has 2
>>>> CPU's. This had no effect.
>>>>
>>>> In summary, NFS works at full speed both ways. Samba/FTP are
>>>> fast on reads but snail slow on writes.
>>>>
>>>> My next thought is to install ClearOS, test it, and copy their
>>>> smb.conf. Or install CentOS 5.x and see if it has the same
>>>> problems.
>>>>
>>>> Any ideas where to look on this one? smb.conf necessary.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
>>>> <mailto:PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us>
>>>>
>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------
>>>> PLUG-discuss mailing list -PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
>>>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>>>> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------
>> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
>> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
--
James McPhee
jmcphe@gmail.com
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)