>> >> After a frustrating experience with a Linksys WRT54GL, I've decided to >> >> stick with Gentoo routers. This increases the number of Gentoo >> >> systems I'm responsible for and they're nearing double-digits. What >> >> can be done to make the management of multiple Gentoo systems easier? >> >> I think identical hardware in each system would help a lot but I'm not >> >> sure that's practical. I need to put together a bunch of new >> >> workstations and I'm thinking some sort of server/client arrangement >> >> with the only Gentoo install being on the server could be appropriate. >> > >> > I maintain multiple Gentoo we mostly use as KVM hosts systems (and >> > coming embedded routers). As KVM hosts, some of them are very sensible. >> > Due to the contracts to our customers, I have to do with various update >> > strategies on top of various hardware. >> >> Thanks to everyone for some very juicy tidbits. I'm rearranging my >> thinking on all of this. I think the key for me may be to combine >> systems with separate functions in the same physical location into a >> single system. Does the KVM thing work well? > > KVM itself works very well here, even with advanced features such as KSM > pages sharing. > > The difficulties come with Microsoft products for both good integration > and perfomance (I would recommend RAW format, iSCSI or plain physical > partition instead of qcow2, for example). That beeing said, I finally > have all working well for XP, NT2003 and 2008 servers. > > I use libvirt on top of KVM which is in the way to become very good AFA > you don't rely on libvirt's API which tend to move a lot. > >> Running a bunch of >> workstations as nothing more than wireless KVM setups on the same >> system? I should be able to cut my Gentoo systems down to just a few. >> Basically one at each physical location. > > I would be much sceptical for both workstations and wireless guests than > for servers: > > 1) For workstations, things are currently changing with the very recent > and "not much usable with Gentoo, yet" spice software. I expect a lot of > improvments in the coming months for this use case. I would say it's not > ready for production, yet. > > 2) About wireless virtualization it's highly depending on what you aim > to do, especially if you intend to use the PCI passthrough feature to > give your wireless card to a guest. For this to work, you MUST have your > hardware (CPU, motherboard and PCI card) VT-d compatible which is > currently NOT a piece of cake, today. It relies on industry and > manufacturers moving not as fast as software. I would expect more widely > VT-d cards in the coming _years_. > > Now, if you intend to use the wireless card from you hosts and share > networks using bridge utilities it _MAY_ be OK: Linux bridging does not > always work with all wireless cards (see http://tinyurl.com/ylcutwv for > more information). > > > In a more general approach, when I hear "routers" and "wireless" I'm > more thinking _embedded_. KVM/qemu would only help you to build your > target systems. > > > For embedded (or tiny, at least) systems, I would not use LXC. > > The drawback with Gentoo is that the current official uclibc stage3 for > embedded/tiny systems is obsolete and marked as experimental. In facts, > it's very _hard_ if not impossible to use it these days. Making your own > cross-compilation environment is not a piece of cake (too), even with > dedicated tools such as crossdev. This topic would ask its own book. > So, if you want to try Gentoo embedded save your time by working on > unofficial stage3. > > -- > Nicolas Sebrecht
I think I'm guilty of assumption regarding your original reference to KVM. I assumed you mean keyboard-video-mouse: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KVM_switch but now I think you meant Kernel-based Virtual Machine: http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Main_Page And now that I look more closely at KVM switches, it looks like they provide a method of controlling multiple computers via a single keyboard, monitor, and mouse. I need sort of the inverse. I'd like to control a single Gentoo computer via multiple sets of keyboards, monitors, and mice simultaneously. It would basically be a way to have the functionality of multiple workstations but the administration hassle of only a single system. Wireless communication between the computer and each keyboard-monitor-mouse would be most convenient, but that may not be possible so wired would be fine. Does something like this exist? - Grant
