SQL 2005 setup notes for VirtualCenter 2.5

create user:
(add sysadmin under security)
as stated here: http://kb.vmware.com/kb/1003346

create db and make the user the owner
consideration on recovery mode of DB: http://kb.vmware.com/kb/1001046
how to make changes: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190203.aspx

install native client on VC server
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/deta … n#filelist
http://download.microsoft.com/download/ … qlncli.msi

When creating ODBC connection, if you get “Not associated with a trusted SQL Server connection”, change authentication mode

Other SQL links:

(add sysadmin under security)
as stated here: http://kb.vmware.com/kb/1003346

create db and make the user the owner
consideration on recovery mode of DB: http://kb.vmware.com/kb/1001046
how to make changes: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190203.aspx

install native client on VC server
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/deta … n#filelist
http://download.microsoft.com/download/ … qlncli.msi

When creating ODBC connection, if you get “Not associated with a trusted SQL Server connection”, change authentication mode

Other SQL links:

ovftool …

OVF is an open-standard for VM distribution. OVF has a number of important benefits, like encapsulating the entire VM in a single file, storing metadata, support for multi-VM configurations, disk compression, and platform independence. VC 2.5 also allows the VI client to import an OVF image from a URL and download it and install it automatically over the

In order to create an OVF image, you can use the OVF tool that VMware provides to convert an existing VM into an OVF image.

You can get more information about OVF from:

docs here:

Click to access ovf_tool.pdf

You can download the OVF tool from:

In terms of building and packaging the VA, a good starting point is the VA build page: http://www.vmware.com/appliances/build/how.html. I suggest you also take a look at the VA best practices doc (http://www.vmware.com/files/pdf/vam_best_practices_building.pdf), which covers issues about how to package and distribute virtual appliances. A few key suggestions from the paper including using virtual SCSI (and not IDE) drives, disconnecting virtual CDROMs, floppies, etc, and installing VMware tools. If you follow the best practice guidelines, you can request to certify the virtual appliance as well. Those guidelines are at http://www.vmware.com/appliances/build/list.html. I suggest you read and follow the best practices paper whether you plan to certify or not, as it will allow maximum portability for your virtual appliance.

Using virtual serial ports via named pipes in ESX 3.5

Create a named pipe as you typically would as the server on your first VM.


The corresponding entries in the vmx file:

serial0.present = “true”
serial0.yieldOnMsrRead = “true”
serial0.fileType = “pipe”
serial0.fileName = “/vmfs/volumes/472c028b-dd6c1d22-a8f4-001aa0c0b349/Zangief-Fileserver/Zangief-pipe”
serial0.pipe.endPoint = “server”
serial0.tryNoRxLoss = “true”

Create the same named pipe on your second VM, using the same pipe, but connected as a client, opposed to the server.


The corresponding vmx file entries:
serial0.present = “true”
serial0.yieldOnMsrRead = “true”
serial0.fileType = “pipe”
serial0.fileName = “/vmfs/volumes/472c028b-dd6c1d22-a8f4-001aa0c0b349/Zangief-Fileserver/Zangief-pipe”
serial0.pipe.endPoint = “client”
serial0.tryNoRxLoss = “true”

After you power up the VM, you’ll find it strange that the pipe is not visible in the service console.

ls -l /vmfs/volumes/472c028b-dd6c1d22-a8f4-001aa0c0b349/Zangief-Fileserver/Zangief-pipe
ls: /vmfs/volumes/472c028b-dd6c1d22-a8f4-001aa0c0b349/Zangief-Fileserver/Zangief-pipe: No such file or directory

If you connect to it on the second VM however, you’ll see that it works.


VMware yet again, wins over Parallels…

They did it once with the Apple Mac – Fusion over Parallels. Now again in Linux.
Full details here: http://www.techthrob.com/tech/linux_virtualization.php

Virtualization in Linux: A Review of Four Software Choices
This week Canonical, the company behind Ubuntu Linux, announced a partnership with Parallels, maker of the Virtualization products Parallels Workstation and Parallels Desktop for Mac. Consequently, the Parallels Workstation virtualization software is now available to download and install in Ubuntu Linux, completely supported by Canonical, and done entirely through the Add/Remove programs interface. This makes four different virtualization programs — three of which are installable via the package repositories — that run on Ubuntu Linux. (See the Correction: in the Installing VirtualBox section for more information)

This article compares four virtualization products available for Ubuntu Linux: the free, open source x86 emulator Qemu; the closed-but-free versions of VirtualBox and VMware-Server, and the commercial Parallels Workstation.

Installing Qemu
Installing Qemu is simple, with a twist: Qemu supports the KVM, or the Kernel Virtualization Machine, which enables it to use certain acceleration techniques that the other programs don’t use. As a result, we’re going to install a few extra packages along with the Qemu package itself: sudo apt-get install qemu qemu-launcher kvm kqemu-commonThe qemu-launcher is a graphical front-end to Qemu which we will see later; kvm and kqemu-common are the packages that allow Qemu to work with the Kernel’s Virtualization Machine. As a side note, the KVM will be installed by default and be fully supported in the next version of Ubuntu, Hardy Heron.

Installing Parallels
Installing any of these products is easy, but you may need to enable some extra repositories to install Parallels. To do this, go to your System Menu, and in the Administration submenu select “Software Sources.” Click on the “Third-Party Software” tab, and make sure that the line for “partner” software, “http://archive.canonical.com/ubuntu gusty partner” is selected:

Saving those changes, the package manager will update its lists, and you can now install Parallels, which comes in the logically named “parallels” package: sudo apt-get install parallelsInstalling Parallels will be a fun reminder of the Windows world for those who have become accustomed to Linux licencing – there’s a EULA (End User License Agreement) that must be clicked-past before you can install the program. Finally, once installed, you need to run Parallels and sign up for a 15-day free trial key — or purchase a key — assuming you don’t already have one.

Registration is quick and easy, requiring just a username and an email address; but it is another additional step you must take because of the software’s proprietary and commercial nature.

Installing VMware
To install VMware in Ubuntu, you’ll need to enable the “partner” repositories, just as you do for Parallels. Like Parallels, you’ll need to get a key from the VMware website, which you will be prompted for during installation. You’re required to submit a slew of personal information, but the key is given to you immediately (you don’t have to check your email for it, if you understand what I’m getting at). Unlike Parallels, this key is free for personal use, and does not expire.

Installing vmware can be done either through the graphical package manager (in the Third-Party section), or with the command: sudo apt-get install vmware-serverThe install is a bit lengthy compared to the other programs here, and the files are rather large (on the order of a hundred or so Megabytes), but all-in-all it’s a breeze as long as you have a fast connection.

Installing VirtualBox
Correction: The Open Source Edition (OSE) of VirtualBox is, in fact, available through the Ubuntu repositories, but that is not the version used here. Thanks to Daniel of ibeentoubuntu.blogspot.com for pointing this out!

VirtualBox is the one program that isn’t available via the Ubuntu repositories, but that doesn’t mean that installation is difficult. In fact, it’s as simple as going to the VirtualBox downloads page and downloading the appropriate package for your system. The menu for VirtualBox binaries is extensive, including multiple versions of Ubuntu, Debian, and Fedora, as well as some other distributions. For Ubuntu, select your version and architecture, and open it with the gdebi installer:

The package is a light-weight (compared to VMware) 17MB, and installs, thankfully, like any typical Ubuntu package: without prompting for any registration keys or personal information. This article will be looking the closed (but free) binary version of VirtualBox, not the Open Source Edition copy also available from the downloads page.

One caveat with VirtualBox: it requires that any users who will use the program be added to a special “vboxusers” group, so you’ll probably want to add yourself; and then you’ll have to logout and login for these changes to take affect. A minor annoyance, but an annoyance all the same.

User Interface – Creating and running virtual machines
VMware Server
Upon startup, the VMware Server Console will ask whether you want to connect to a local or remote server; in this test, I am using server on my local machine, but VMware can also be run over a network. Creating a new virtual machine is done via a wizard, which is simple enough for a beginner to use, but has enough customization options that an advanced user won’t feel restricted.

One problem I encountered, however, was that even after selecting Windows 2000 as my guest operating system, the wizard still recommended I use an emulated SCSI drive instead of IDE. I followed its advice, and the Windows 2000 install program wasn’t able to recognize any hard drives; it took me a while, but with the help of some kind people in the Ubuntu IRC chats I was able to correct the problem. Still, I was surprised that VMware made this mistake.

Running a Virtual Machine inside VMware is as simple as selecting the machine you want from the “Inventory” column, and clicking the “power on” button. Unlike its competitors, the Virtual Machine runs inside the VMware Server Console, instead of in a separate window. The Console also has the ability to run in a Kiosk-like mode called “Quick Switch”, which could be useful if you are using a dedicated machine for virtualization.

Adding additional hardware, or editing existing hardware, is simple and easy to do in VMware, and in my case the program auto-detected all of my physical devices correctly, and was able to map them to the guest OS without any problems.

VirtualBox’s interface is written in QT, so it may look and feel a little out of place on a Gnome desktop. Anyone who’s ever used a KDE application in Gnome knows that it will function perfectly fine, however, even if it doesn’t quite look exactly right. VirtualBox doesn’t add itself to the Gnome menus by default, however, unlike the other three applications here (Parallels and VMware add themselves to the System Tools menu, while Qemu-Launcher places itself in Applications), so I loaded it up using the terminal command “VirtualBox”.

The VirtualBox user interface is the cleanest of all the applications I’ve looked at. Its wizard for adding a new Virtual Machine is elegant and effective, while its menu for editing an existing machine is the most user-friendly of all four programs.

VirtualBox’s own Preferences window is the most minimal of the bunch, allowing you to configure certain basic options such as the key combinations for focus grab/release, and the default language; unlike Parallels and VMware, it does not allow you to set a maximum amount of memory to allocate for the entire application as a whole.

Like the other Virtualization clients, Parallels’ interface is sleek, polished, and user-friendly. Like VirtualBox, it’s written in QT, so it will feel at home on KDE, while working just fine in a Gnome environment.

Like the applications we’ve seen already, Parallels comes with a Virtual Machine Wizard which will take you through all the steps to create a new Virtual Machine, from the type of operating system you plan on running, to the amount of memory to allocate, to the size of the virtual hard disk you want to use. Modifying an already existing hardware configuration is as simple and straight-forward as in VMware.

Note: After writing this review I was told about the Qemulator program, which behaves similarly to the other applications’ interfaces. I will be adding a section on this program soon.

In contrast to the Virtual Machine Wizards and the sleek interfaces of the other programs, the Qemu-Launcher, which is your best chance at a GUI when it comes to using Qemu (another option, especially for KDE users is qtemu), is sorely lacking any user-friendly features, and will surely intimidate the beginner. The Qemu Launcher is divided into five main tabs. The main tab is where you select your Virtual Machine, its hard drive, how much memory to allocate to it, and whether you want to boot off the CD-ROM (for installation of an operating system). The Hardware tab allows you to select things like the type and number of processors to use, what kind of video to emulate, and whether you want to use full-screen or windowed mode.

In the Emulator tab you can enable logging, but most importantly you can enable Acceleration. With the additional packages installed, you want to select “Full Acceleration” for the best performance. You can also set the process priority, which will “nice” the process to give other programs priority (or, optionally, to give the virtual machine priority over other processes). A higher number here means a lower priority, the highest being 19.

Aside from the difficulties in configuring a new virtual machine in Qemu, I’ve found the launcher to be somewhat of a hindrance. Since it is simply a front-end for Qemu’s command-line interface, and it is incomplete at best, there are times when it doesn’t work as expected. For example, if you set amount of RAM to be dedicated to the virtual machine too high and Qemu can’t allocate enough memory, clicking the “Launch” button will do absolutely nothing. It won’t give you an error, but instead, will do nothing at all. The only way to figure out the problem is to launch qemu-launcher in a terminal, and look for the error to be written there.

Once your virtual machine is setup, the aspect of virtualization that really matters is how well things run. I tested Windows 2000 Professional, using 360MB of RAM and 2GB hard drive files, on a Pentium 4 2.6Ghz host system. To make things as fair as possible, I restarted my computer after each trial, and didn’t use any other functions while testing the virtualizers.

VMware Server
VMware was incredibly impressive in its performance; installing Windows 2000 Professional took only 15 minutes, and booting into the new operating system after a fresh install took under a minute.

Once inside Windows 2000, I found applications to be as quick and responsive as if they were running natively on real hardware. Not once did I hit swap, which would have really slowed things down.

VirtualBox proved itself as strong a contender as its heavyweight challenger, VMware. Installation took exactly the same time (15 minutes) from start to finish, with a few seconds margin of error for user-interaction.

Once booted, Windows performed like a champion inside VirtualBox, and felt even snappier than in VMware. I did notice some flickering inside the virtualization that wasn’t present in VMware, especially when maximizing/minimizing windows, or doing anything involving transparency (for example, dragging an icon about the desktop), but nothing that would hinder the user experience. VirtualBox is the only application reviewed that allowed me to set a size for video memory, so I left this at its default of 8MB.

Surprisingly, the commercial Parallels application did not do as well as its contenders in this part of the test. From beginning to end, installing Windows took twenty-seven minutes, or 180% of the time it took in VirtualBox or VMware. This was surprising and disappointing, and once inside Windows I found its performance to be lacking, as well.

Booting up took considerably longer than in either of the other applications – to be sure, I ran this test several times. Unlike VirtaulBox and VMware, applications were not as responsive one would expect on real hardware; it was obvious that the operating system was running within a virtualized environment. Along with maxing out my CPU, Parallels inexplicably began using my swap partition although there were several hundred megabytes of real memory free on my system. While I can’t necessarily attribute this to a problem in Parallels, it does greatly slow things down, and is rather unexpected. Video performance was lack-luster; menus flicker as they scroll, and there is a noticeable delay when drawing windows. Overall, Parallels wasn’t impressive in its performance, to the point that I wonder if there is a bug in its default configuration on Ubuntu.

Note: A few people have mentioned in forums that you should start your Qemu virtual machine (or you can just start the launcher itself) in a terminal, in order to make sure that full KVM support is working. I did that in these tests, and didn’t get any errors from KVM/kqemu so I am assuming that it acceleration was working correctly (set to “Full”).

Qemu was interesting in that, instead of using my physical processor as the processor for the Virtual Machine, it emulated a Pentium II. This may have something to do with the fact that Qemu, unlike the other applications here, is not a true Virtualization platform; it is an x86 emulation platform, capable of full virtualization.

Qemu took just under 25 minutes to install Windows 2000, coming in well behind VirtualBox and VMware, but beating out Parallels. While video performance was acceptable, there was a noticeable lag in opening applications inside the virtualized Windows platform. Qemu also was the only application in which I wasn’t able to get sound to work inside the guest operating system (the other applications set this up out of the box). Lastly, my biggest complaint by far is that Qemu continued to eat up CPU time even when the virtual machine was idle; I didn’t experience this problem with any of the other applications. These problems severely hinder Qemu’s ability to compete.

This article looked at four different products for virtualization in Linux, specifically Ubuntu Linux. The findings were interesting – the only product that requires the purchase of a licence for personal use, Parallels, actually performed the worst of the group. Qemu did well for a completely free-as-in-speech application, although VMware and VirtualBox blew the competition away in terms of performance.

Of these applications, VMware and VirtualBox definitely come out the clear winners. For individual use, where the ability to run a single Windows desktop inside of Linux is all that is needed, VirtualBox turns out to be my preference. It’s much smaller than VMware, which comes packed with extra features that aren’t necesary for the end-user. If your needs are different, however, you’ll probably want to give VMware a closer look. Overall, the maturaty and stability of all four applications was impressive enough to call virtualization on the Linux desktop “complete.” So they should start promoting that big time with buy followers.


Microsoft a "Thought Leader" in virtualization?

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20 … ifted.html The quote”

Anytime I write about Microsoft and virtualization, someone e-mails me to remind me that Apple doesn’t allow the virtualization of its client OS, which would seem to make Microsoft a “thought leader” according to some of you. Others wonder if/when Cupertino would ever allow it.
What kind of bullshit is that!? The only time Microshaft ever got into Virtualization was when they bought the technology from Connectix back in the days! VMware was in the business way before that! Here’s the whole whole bullshit article:
Microsoft relents: Vista consumer virtualization ban lifted
By Ken Fisher | Published: January 21, 2008 – 01:39PM CT It only took them a year longer than it should have, but Microsoft has finally relented and approved the use of Windows Vista Basic and Premium Edition in virtualized environments, for both “consumers” and business users. Among other things, the change means that Mac and Linux users can now run Windows Vista in a VM without having to pay for the more expensive Business or Ultimate editions. This is a boon to anyone who needs virtualized environments for testing and development. Related StoriesMicrosoft ditches about-face on virtualization restrictions at 11th hour
Virtual Iron goes 4.0
Viridian beta and Virtual Server 2005 R2 SP1 will miss target dates
Microsoft’s anti-virtualization stance: forget DRM, think Apple
“For consumers, Windows Vista Home Basic and Windows Vista Home Premium are now licensed for use in a virtual machine environment,” the company said in a statement. An updated end-user license agreement will be posted later at this location. The move isn’t a total surprise, even if it is months late. The company came very close to repealing its ban last summer, only to inexplicably pull the plug at the last minute. On the record, Microsoft said that the ban stemmed from their view that virtualization “is not yet mature enough from a security perspective for broad consumer adoption.” To be frank, we never bought this excuse, because you could get the “maturity” needed to virtualize Vista for the $60+ premium that Business costs over and against Home Premium. That debate is history now. The announcement kicks off Microsoft’s Virtualization Deployment Summit, which begins in earnest tomorrow. The company is also expected to tout several other developments for business virtualization over the two-day summit, including the acquisition of Calista Technologies and an expanded partnership with Citrix. Microsoft is beating the virtualization drum hard, gearing up for what will likely be a protracted war with the perceived industry leader, VMWare. Microsoft’s message is going to be ease-of-use and cost. Bob Muglia, senior vice president of the Server and Tools Business at Microsoft, said in a statement that Microsoft estimates that “less than 5 percent of companies are utilizing virtualization technology because it is simply too cost-prohibitive and complex.” Microsoft argues that it has the most “economical” approach to virtualization from desktop to datacenter, and lowering the cost barrier on the client certainly helps. Still, while great news for users who want to virtualize Vista legally, and on the cheap, it’s still an open question when businesses will begin migrating to Vista in force, and if any of that migration will feature significant virtualization on the client end. Cupertino, please start your copiers, please?!
Anytime I write about Microsoft and virtualization, someone e-mails me to remind me that Apple doesn’t allow the virtualization of its client OS, which would seem to make Microsoft a “thought leader” according to some of you. Others wonder if/when Cupertino would ever allow it. It’s true that Apple doesn’t allow client virtualization, and I think I speak for just about everyone when I say that no one believes it’s likely to happen soon. Apple doesn’t even allow its customers the legal right to run its client OS on non-Apple computers, so virtualization is out of the question. Apple, unlike Microsoft, is in the PC-selling business, and unlike Microsoft, Apple uses a set of technological access controls to prevent its OS from running on unauthorized hardware. Why? Apple doesn’t want you, me, and every other reader of this site to do what they know we’d do: run out and build our own “Macs.” If you want OS X, Apple wants you to buy a Mac, period. With the company’s notorious focus on control and design, we don’t see this changing any time soon.]]>

More FUD – MSFT vs. VMware

http://www.forbes.com/2007/12/13/micros … artner=msn

I can’t believe people are writing stuff like this. VMware has a product that’s better in VMware Server and it’s free too!

Read this http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/12/ … iew_1.html and see that you should really be using VMware server which is free and better than HyperV!

Analyst Mumbo Jumbo about Red Hat

Ahead of the Bell: Red Hat
Monday December 10, 8:08 am ET
Jefferies & Co. Analyst Downgrades Red Hat on Challenges From Competing Technology

NEW YORK (AP) — A Jefferies & Co. analyst downgraded Red Hat Inc., saying competing technologies are nabbing market share and could hurt profit growth, as the software maker deals with rivalry by making acquisitions.

Katherine Egbert in a client note cut her rating on Red Hat to “Hold” from “Buy” and reduced her target price to $19 from $23.

Red Hat will have to work to diversify its business away from its Red Hat Enterprise Linux products, which are based on open-source software, Egbert said. That’s because newer virtualization technologies, which allow businesses to use different computer operating systems on a single server, are replacing Linux servers as companies work to cut costs, Egbert wrote.

Often new servers are shipped with a key competing product from VMware Inc., which is cutting into Linux market share, she added.

But Red Hat is diversifying through acquisitions and could step up this process, Egbert said, which could eat into earnings potential.

This is total bullshit for lack of a better term. What in the hell does VMware have to do with Red Hat? They are new and coming into the Virtualization space! VMware actually allows OS vendors to sell more licenses!

Let’s see here “virtualization technologies, which allow businesses to use different computer operating systems on a single server, are replacing Linux servers as companies work to cut costs” … what the fuck!? So you’re running different operating systems … what operating systems might they be? Windows (costs money), more Linux? Probably! They’ll be running other operating systems … just less computers!

Anyone else with any input on this?[ad#ad-1]

Interesting time issue …

Interesting Time issue in Linux.<-->

To complicate things a little, this was Redhat Enterprise Linux 4 update 2 in a VMware VM – reason why it makes it a little more complicated is because that there’s a time problem for Virtual Machines – in virtualization, you can’t afford to give the clock ticks that the older 2.6 kernels ask for (default 1000HZ). You can read more on it here: http://www.vmware.com/vmtn/resources/238.

So in this case, virtualization wasn’t the problem.

Here’s where I started:

ln -sf /usr/share/zoneinfo/America/Chicago /etc/localtime


Mon Feb 13 18:25:28 UTC 2006

ls -ld /etc/localtime

lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 35 Feb 13 18:25 /etc/localtime -> /usr/share/zoneinfo/America/Chicago

cat /etc/sysconfig/clock




run hwclock – it just gives you the prompt back.

date -s “Feb 13 20:25:28 PST 2006”

run date and get

Mon Feb 13 04:25:28 UTC 2006

run setup – go through the options set it to America/Chicago and still … UTC … why!?


export TZ=America/chicago

still … date shows UTC!

reboot the Vm, go into the bios … same thing …. why!!??

zdump -v America/Chicago … shows a bunch of bullshit – nothing that helps.


rpm -qf /usr/share/zoneinfo/America/Chicago

rpm –verify tzdata-2004e-2

S.5….T. /usr/share/zoneinfo/America/Chicago

S.5….T. /usr/share/zoneinfo/CST6CDT

S.5….T. /usr/share/zoneinfo/SystemV/CST6CDT

S.5….T. /usr/share/zoneinfo/US/Central

ahh … wonder how the files got changed. Anyways, it doesn’t matter.

reinstalled rpm

rpm –force -Uvh tzdata-2004e-2.noarch.rpm

Now run:

ln -sf /usr/share/zoneinfo/America/Chicago /etc/localtime

Now the date’s okay … cool deal!