A brief comparison of Virtualisation Solutions

If you’ve looked at virtualising a set of servers, you’ll be aware that there are a number of different solutions out on the market at the moment. I’ll break this up by “free” (no cash outlay) vs “commercial” solutions.

This is NOT a comprehensive review, just a quick overview of the particular platforms I’ve used.


  1. VMware – There’s a free solution available for a single host, but vSphere only allows a single hypervisor, so live migration is not possible. Hardware support is also not particularly broad. Performance is solid, however.
  2. Xen (Open Source version) – This was previously the default virtualisation platform built into RedHat and CentOS. Works well, but my tests showed that system performance was better on KVM unless the system was using a paravirtualised kernel (i.e. the kernel was talking to the hardware with minimal intervention by the hypervisor.) Live migration works with Xen under KVM.
  3. KVM – This is the “Linux native” virtualisation layer. Getting clustering working properly is a pain in the neck – in particular sharing a SAN is difficult to set up properly – but it is possible. However, as far as I am aware the free version of KVM does not have a good way to ensure that only a single instance of a VM is running when sharing resources across multiple hypervisor (host) systems. This may have changed since I last had to set up a KVM cluster a few years ago.

Overall, if picking a “free” solution, I would pick VMware if only using a single hypervisor host or KVM if clustering multiple hosts. My home lab uses VMware. This is partly because it allows nesting of VMs and I don’t want to run multiple hypervisors to reduce power requirements.

In a commercial environment, you should almost always run multiple hypervisors. This allows you to migrate guests between systems for server upgrades and patching, without requiring downtime for your guest systems.


  1. VMware – Solid and flexible, with decent performance. As the industry leaders, there are a LOT of tools around to help. Probably the easiest system for P2V (Physical to Virtual) conversions as well.
  2. Hyper-V – This is the Microsoft solution and as such lies on top of Windows 2008 or 2012. Windows 2012 includes substantial improvements. P2V tools are limited to recent releases of Windows. It is possible to build NEW non-Windows VMs, however. Seems to work well, but I can’t claim extensive experience.
  3. Xen – Citrix Xen is still available as a commercial product but I can’t comment on it beyond saying that hardware support seems a little limited.

While Hyper-V looks cheaper at first blush the VMWare Essentials package covers three hypervisors for a similar cost to three Windows 2012 licences. On the other hand, hardware support under Windows is hard to beat.

In general I would suggest VMWare but check hardware compatibility BEFORE you buy your hardware, and confirm with VMware directly if possible. If you don’t have control over your hardware, or you want your hypervisor to perform other tasks outside of a virtual environment, Hyper-V is a better solution.

Wireless insecurity

I’m not generally a fan of wireless networking. If you have the option of using a cabled network, you should probably take the option. This is partly because the radio spectrum available is shared between users, and so will never be as fast as an equivalent wired network; and partly because a wireless network can be cracked by somebody nearby and you have no easy way of knowing it’s happening.

Lifehacker has an article on cracking WPA protected networks which is worth a read. The motto: Turn off WPS if your router supports it. Ideally, permit access to systems by MAC address (most wireless routers support this). (If you’re using WEP… don’t. Switch to WPA2.)

I should add that wireless networking does have its place, but you should work on the assumption that if you’re using wireless then your network may not be secure.

Philosophy of tech support

A few observations on working in technical support.

  • Make sure you understand the user’s underlying need. Sometimes you’ll get a request asking to do one thing, when the user has actually taken the first few steps in thinking through solutions themselves, and is asking you to solve that problem rather than their real problem (which may be much simpler.) There may be a simpler, more elegant solution to their problem if you know what they’re trying to accomplish.
  • Make it easy for users to describe their problem. For example, keep network drive assignments consistent across the board (The T: drive should always point to the same share). Colour-code printer names; it’s a lot easier to say there is a fault with “the black printer” than with “the Kyocera 2100D near where Jacqui sits.”
  • Provide frequent feedback. If you are dealing with a fault, let the person requesting the fix know that it’s still being worked on, even if little progress is being made. Communication is key.
  • Underpromise and Overdeliver. When asked what benefits will be provided, be conservative about the benefits and timetable, but try to deliver more than was promised and ahead of time. If you promise a feature in one week and deliver in two, your users will be unhappy. If you promise delivery in three weeks and deliver in two, they will typically be happy. This leads to a related point…
  • Don’t overestimate yourself. I’ve found most technical staff (including myself) will underestimate the time taken for any given task. Most commonly this is because they haven’t taken the time needed for testing & debugging into account. When making an estimate, remember your limitations. For nontrivial tasks, your first impulse should be to double your initial estimate.
  • Complaints are golden. Any complaint is a vote of confidence in your ability to solve a problem. If your users are very quiet it may not be a good sign – your users may have given up on you as a source of help.
  • Don’t be afraid to inform users of the scope of a request. As technical staff, when asked to do something or if something is possible, our initial response is initially to say “yes, but…” People don’t hear the “but”; they only hear the “yes”. Couch your answer in terms of costs, or answer “effectively no”. If your answer is “That will take eight hours’ work; are you sure you don’t want me working on (some other important problem) instead?” most people will decline gracefully.
  • Don’t always turn down the hard requests. This is the flipside of ensuring that users know how hard a request is. It can sometimes be tempting to tell somebody that a job that is merely difficult is impossible.Taking those jobs will stretch your skills and, if done right, substantially benefit your user base.

Underappreciated Anime

Listing a few anime that I’ve particularly enjoyed but which rarely seem to rate a mention elsewhere:

  • Kurau – Phantom Memory. This explores issues including what it means to be human, treatment of alient intelligences, and abuse of power.
  • Alien 9. The anime for this is a bit weird but halts before getting to the interesting material, making it difficult to sympathise with the viewpoint character, Yuri. The anime keeps going , hinting darkly that the schools are being run more for the aliens’ benefit than the students’.
  • KamiChu! This is about an elementary school student who discovers one day that she has been promoted to being a god, or kami. She meets other gods and supernatural creatures, and gets roped into taking wish requests by her friends, and sponsoring the nearby temple. (US release only.)

I’ll probably add some more entries later on.