On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 03:36, dbneeley <dbneeley@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm still mystified as to why you would wish to run a CLI-only distro, VM or not.
>
> After all, a CLI window can be opened easily in any version of Linux of which I am aware and the results would be pretty much the
> same.
Because if you're running a server that needs to handle the load of
hundreds of thousands of access requests *or more* per hour, you want
every bit of resource allocated to handling those requests. You don't
want 25-40% of your system resources used up just to run a GUI.
Or insert any other resource intensive use for a server (which in
most, though not all cases) that needs to be up and available 99.9% of
the time.
> The only advantage running any OS in a VM would be to gain experience using the VM, unless I'm missing something here.
There's lots of advantages to running in VMs... using VMs, I can load
my primary OS and can evaluate, test and use any other OS, or
combinations of OSs.... I've created clouds and HA clusters in VMs on
my laptop.
On servers, I've used VMs to run 80+ instances of an OS on one set of
hardware...
From a professional point of view, virtualizaton (using things like
VMWare, KVM or Xen) allows a company to buy a server and get 100%
utilization of it's resources, instead of buying a server that may sit
50% idle most of the time. Not to mention that they can condense the
amount of hardware they have to maintain: e.g. it's easier to maintain
one server with 30 VM webservers (and cheaper too) than to run 30
individual bare metal web servers.
No comments:
Post a Comment