[CentOS] Intel NIC

[Helmut Drodofsky]

Hallo,
 
actual Intel Ethernet cards PCI-E
-  Are normal recognized by Centos 5.5 Live CD
-  Not recognized by 5.2
Because of vmware, I will use 5.2
 
Update kernel?
Update Modules? What Module? 
 
Thanks for help
 
Helmut
 ___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Laurent Wandrebeck]

On Fri, 17 Dec 2010 08:44:46 +0100
"Helmut Drodofsky"  wrote:

> Hallo,
Hi,
>  
> actual Intel Ethernet cards PCI-E
> -  Are normal recognized by Centos 5.5 Live CD
> -  Not recognized by 5.2
> Because of vmware, I will use 5.2
Can't you use Xen or KVM ? That way, you,ll have an up to date OS.
If not possible, updating kernel may be sufficient to make vmware work…
or break.
HTH,
Laurent


pgp2XY96qKT4b.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Peter Kjellström]

On Friday, December 17, 2010 08:44:46 am Helmut Drodofsky wrote:
> Hallo,
> 
> actual Intel Ethernet cards PCI-E
> -  Are normal recognized by Centos 5.5 Live CD
> -  Not recognized by 5.2
> Because of vmware, I will use 5.2

It's not recommended to run CentOS-5.2 (many serious security 
vulnerabilities).

/Peter
 
> Update kernel?
> Update Modules? What Module?
> 
> Thanks for help
> 
> Helmut


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Lamar Owen]

On Friday, December 17, 2010 02:44:46 am Helmut Drodofsky wrote:
> Hallo,
>  
> actual Intel Ethernet cards PCI-E
> -  Are normal recognized by Centos 5.5 Live CD
> -  Not recognized by 5.2
> Because of vmware, I will use 5.2

Why?  Are you wanting it as a VMware host or guest?  As the kernels are 
basically identical in terms of the version string, the VMware kernel modules, 
for VMware Server or Workstation as a host, and VMware tools as a guest, should 
load without a recompile.

I'm running a number of CentOS 5.5 guests on VMware ESX 3.5U5 with no issue.

Which VMware is this, type and version, please?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Helmut Drodofsky]

- I'm using 5.2 or 5.3 as a host.
- my expierince: 5.4 is not stable with vmware as a host.

The hosts are completely behind firewall.

Vmware server 2.0.2-203138

With 5.3 my problem was solved.

Helmut


-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: centos-boun...@centos.org [mailto:centos-boun...@centos.org] Im Auftrag 
von Lamar Owen
Gesendet: Freitag, 17. Dezember 2010 15:31
An: CentOS mailing list
Betreff: Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

On Friday, December 17, 2010 02:44:46 am Helmut Drodofsky wrote:
> Hallo,
>  
> actual Intel Ethernet cards PCI-E
> -  Are normal recognized by Centos 5.5 Live CD
> -  Not recognized by 5.2
> Because of vmware, I will use 5.2

Why?  Are you wanting it as a VMware host or guest?  As the kernels are 
basically identical in terms of the version string, the VMware kernel modules, 
for VMware Server or Workstation as a host, and VMware tools as a guest, should 
load without a recompile.

I'm running a number of CentOS 5.5 guests on VMware ESX 3.5U5 with no issue.

Which VMware is this, type and version, please?
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Lamar Owen]

On Friday, December 17, 2010 11:21:29 am Helmut Drodofsky wrote:
> Vmware server 2.0.2-203138

And that would be the most recent build.

> With 5.3 my problem was solved.

Have you tried 5.5 yet?

For grins and giggles I'm going to play with it on a box I have, but it will be 
a little while before I have anything definitive.

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Les Mikesell]

On 12/17/10 10:21 AM, Helmut Drodofsky wrote:
> - I'm using 5.2 or 5.3 as a host.
> - my expierince: 5.4 is not stable with vmware as a host.
>
> The hosts are completely behind firewall.
>
> Vmware server 2.0.2-203138
>
> With 5.3 my problem was solved.

The 2.x series of vmware server are badly broken with respect to RHEL/Centos - 
plus the change to the web based console is horrible.  I'm running the older 
1.x 
server on several centos 5.5 machines with no problems.  But, if it is at all 
feasible you are better off running the free Vmware ESXi on the host instead of 
the server version.  You do need a windows box to run the remote console, 
though.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[JohnS]

On Fri, 2010-12-17 at 11:11 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 12/17/10 10:21 AM, Helmut Drodofsky wrote:
> The 2.x series of vmware server are badly broken with respect to RHEL/Centos 
> - 
> plus the change to the web based console is horrible.  

Mine is not broken.  The web Admin works like it should.  

> the server version.  You do need a windows box to run the remote console, 
> though.

No you do not that is not so.  The Console can be executed with out ever
going to the web admin.
As in the "plugin" can be executed with out firefox.

John

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Les Mikesell]

On 12/17/10 12:36 PM, JohnS wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2010-12-17 at 11:11 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On 12/17/10 10:21 AM, Helmut Drodofsky wrote:
>> The 2.x series of vmware server are badly broken with respect to RHEL/Centos 
>> -
>> plus the change to the web based console is horrible.
>
> Mine is not broken.  The web Admin works like it should.

Just to be clear - do you mean you are running vmware 2.x server under post 5.2 
Centos without the library issues that everyone else had?   The change to the 
web admin is a separate issue and not technically broken - I just don't like it.

>> the server version.  You do need a windows box to run the remote console, 
>> though.
>
> No you do not that is not so.  The Console can be executed with out ever
> going to the web admin.
> As in the "plugin" can be executed with out firefox.

And this was in the context of ESXi.  Are you saying you can get a console to 
the ESXi server on something other than windows?

-- 
   Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[JohnS]

On Fri, 2010-12-17 at 13:23 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On 12/17/10 12:36 PM, JohnS wrote:
> >
> > Mine is not broken.  The web Admin works like it should.
> 
> Just to be clear - do you mean you are running vmware 2.x server under post 
> 5.2 
> Centos without the library issues that everyone else had?   The change to the 
> web admin is a separate issue and not technically broken - I just don't like 
> it.
> 
> >> the server version.  You do need a windows box to run the remote console, 
> >> though.
> >
> > No you do not that is not so.  The Console can be executed with out ever
> > going to the web admin.
> > As in the "plugin" can be executed with out firefox.
> 
> And this was in the context of ESXi.  Are you saying you can get a console to 
> the ESXi server on something other than windows?

Less,

Your inbox will give you the answer...

John

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Gerhard Schneider]

The problem with VMWare Server is that it is a discontinued product for
longer time and they don't provide us with a suitable replacement.

So our institute had to switch to VMWare workstation that can be run as
a server, too. I'm running CentOS 5.5 as the Host OS and 5.5 and
RHEL6beta as guests. We didn't try out RHEL6 (waiting for CentOS6 :-)

GS

-- 
Gerhard Schneider
Institute of Lightweight Design and e-Mail: g...@ilsb.tuwien.ac.at
Structural Biomechanics (E317) Tel.: +43 664 60 588 3171
Vienna University of Technology / Austria  Fax:+43 1 58801 31799
A-1040 Wien, Gusshausstrasse 27-29 http://www.ilsb.tuwien.ac.at/~gs/




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Lamar Owen]

On Saturday, December 18, 2010 04:19:25 am Gerhard Schneider wrote:
> The problem with VMWare Server is that it is a discontinued product for
> longer time and they don't provide us with a suitable replacement.

VMware wants more people to get hooked on vSphere, so their 'suggested' VMware 
GSX^H^H^HServer replacement is vSphere Hypervisor, aka ESXi Free Edition.  If 
you have suitable hardware you will get better performance with ESXi, but to 
get any of the more advanced functionality will require $$$ and vCenter Server.

I have been looking at transitioning from VI3 (vCenter Server 2.5 and ESX 3.5) 
to something else; the price of vSphere 4 is simply too large to justify, and, 
while I have a valid license for vCenter Server Standard 4, I don't for ESX4 
(it is a long story, and involves some rather precise timing of a difference in 
purchase and support dates for our original VI3 purchase, done in two phases).  
If I had a valid license for the full vSphere 4, I'm still not sure I'd run it, 
as the vCenter Server hardware requirements are steep.

So I'm very seriously considering transitioning from VI3 to CentOS 6 KVM; for 
my situation it might be doable, but I have a lot to learn about KVM before I 
can think about it.  Well, and CentOS 6 has to be out, too.  I use many of the 
more advanced  VI3 features, including vMotion, that means I really have to be 
careful.  I'd want to cluster the hosts and have shared storage on my three 
onsite EMC Clariions.  I'd like to 'RAID' the shared storage between two 
Clariions, actually, which ESX won't do, AFAIK.  So a learning curve is up 
ahead Q1 or Q2 2011.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Les Mikesell]

On 12/18/10 3:19 AM, Gerhard Schneider wrote:
>
> The problem with VMWare Server is that it is a discontinued product for
> longer time and they don't provide us with a suitable replacement.

Do you need something that the 1.x series won't do?  If something works and 
serves your purpose it doesn't matter if it is discontinued or not.

> So our institute had to switch to VMWare workstation that can be run as
> a server, too. I'm running CentOS 5.5 as the Host OS and 5.5 and
> RHEL6beta as guests. We didn't try out RHEL6 (waiting for CentOS6 :-)

The other option is to run ESXi and move anything you were running on the host 
to a guest.  You'll get better performance that way but you need to run the 
converter tool on some other machine to get the images copied in.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Rajagopal Swaminathan]

Greetings,

On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 9:13 PM, Lamar Owen  wrote:
> On Saturday, December 18, 2010 04:19:25 am Gerhard Schneider wrote:
> So I'm very seriously considering transitioning from VI3 to CentOS 6 KVM; for 
> my situation it might be doable, but I have a lot to learn about KVM
> before I can think about it.

Have a serious very look at RHEV.

Mindblowing.

But watch out: RHEL full-install that I did not contain bridge utils
(brctl) which is the virtual and real nerve controller -- heart and
neocortex former of any virtualization.

I would also suggest very strongly that one should do HA first, get it
right and then play around with virtualization. else a lot of
frustration will result.
In the same breath I would warmly warn against playing around the idea
of real world *any* Virtualization on a single box. Inviting lotsa
bother.

Centos 5 has all of it and more just be very careful about not munging
the kvm packages. exclude xen altogether if you want kvm.

Its not funny to watch troubleshoot xen and kvm fighting for control
over the real resources. both have, well, attitudes.

I must thank the CentOS team from the bottom of my heart for their
tremendous and humongous efforts under extreme heat and light of the
community :).

Regards,

Rajagopal
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Peter Larsen]

Have you considered looking into redhat enterprise virtualization? If you are 
interested I can put you in touch with a redhat rhev representative?

Lamar Owen  wrote:

>On Saturday, December 18, 2010 04:19:25 am Gerhard Schneider wrote:
>> The problem with VMWare Server is that it is a discontinued product for
>> longer time and they don't provide us with a suitable replacement.
>
>VMware wants more people to get hooked on vSphere, so their 'suggested' VMware 
>GSX^H^H^HServer replacement is vSphere Hypervisor, aka ESXi Free Edition.  If 
>you have suitable hardware you will get better performance with ESXi, but to 
>get any of the more advanced functionality will require $$$ and vCenter Server.
>
>I have been looking at transitioning from VI3 (vCenter Server 2.5 and ESX 3.5) 
>to something else; the price of vSphere 4 is simply too large to justify, and, 
>while I have a valid license for vCenter Server Standard 4, I don't for ESX4 
>(it is a long story, and involves some rather precise timing of a difference 
>in purchase and support dates for our original VI3 purchase, done in two 
>phases).  If I had a valid license for the full vSphere 4, I'm still not sure 
>I'd run it, as the vCenter Server hardware requirements are steep.
>
>So I'm very seriously considering transitioning from VI3 to CentOS 6 KVM; for 
>my situation it might be doable, but I have a lot to learn about KVM before I 
>can think about it.  Well, and CentOS 6 has to be out, too.  I use many of the 
>more advanced  VI3 features, including vMotion, that means I really have to be 
>careful.  I'd want to cluster the hosts and have shared storage on my three 
>onsite EMC Clariions.  I'd like to 'RAID' the shared storage between two 
>Clariions, actually, which ESX won't do, AFAIK.  So a learning curve is up 
>ahead Q1 or Q2 2011.
>___
>CentOS mailing list
>CentOS@centos.org
>http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Lamar Owen]

On Saturday, December 18, 2010 02:56:12 pm Peter Larsen wrote:
> Have you considered looking into redhat enterprise virtualization? If you are 
> interested I can put you in touch with a redhat rhev representative?

Yes, I have.  It's not in the budget right now using the current Red Hat 
pricing model, and my budget is tight.  VI3 was purchased with the server 
hardware under a one-time infrastructure grant that included the initial 
maintenance support agreement and one renewal.  If I had a grant to support it, 
I would likely purchase RHEV; I don't, therefore I can't.

So I'm going to roll my own.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Ross Walker]

On Dec 18, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Lamar Owen  wrote:

> On Saturday, December 18, 2010 04:19:25 am Gerhard Schneider wrote:
>> The problem with VMWare Server is that it is a discontinued product for
>> longer time and they don't provide us with a suitable replacement.
> 
> VMware wants more people to get hooked on vSphere, so their 'suggested' 
> VMware GSX^H^H^HServer replacement is vSphere Hypervisor, aka ESXi Free 
> Edition.  If you have suitable hardware you will get better performance with 
> ESXi, but to get any of the more advanced functionality will require $$$ and 
> vCenter Server.
> 
> I have been looking at transitioning from VI3 (vCenter Server 2.5 and ESX 
> 3.5) to something else; the price of vSphere 4 is simply too large to 
> justify, and, while I have a valid license for vCenter Server Standard 4, I 
> don't for ESX4 (it is a long story, and involves some rather precise timing 
> of a difference in purchase and support dates for our original VI3 purchase, 
> done in two phases).  If I had a valid license for the full vSphere 4, I'm 
> still not sure I'd run it, as the vCenter Server hardware requirements are 
> steep.
> 
> So I'm very seriously considering transitioning from VI3 to CentOS 6 KVM; for 
> my situation it might be doable, but I have a lot to learn about KVM before I 
> can think about it.  Well, and CentOS 6 has to be out, too.  I use many of 
> the more advanced  VI3 features, including vMotion, that means I really have 
> to be careful.  I'd want to cluster the hosts and have shared storage on my 
> three onsite EMC Clariions.  I'd like to 'RAID' the shared storage between 
> two Clariions, actually, which ESX won't do, AFAIK.  So a learning curve is 
> up ahead Q1 or Q2 2011.

There is XenServer from Citrix and I think there is a community version too.

-Ross

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Nico Kadel-Garcia]

On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Peter Larsen
 wrote:
> Have you considered looking into redhat enterprise virtualization? If you are 
> interested I can put you in touch with a redhat rhev representative?

I've looked at it, though not extensively. Given the difficulties I
encountered with KVM, its demands on bridged network ports that force
pair bonding upstream into the virtualization guest, the "QEMU backend
with a new name" that is libvirt, and its dog slow performance under
RHEL 5 and CentOS 5, I threw it out ASAP and stuck with Virtualbox for
home systems (for the graceful interfaces no matter the hosting
platform)) and VMWare Workstation (to deal with SCO OpenServer: don't
ask).

Hopefully RHEL 6/CentOS 6 will resolve the difficulties. The burden of
NetworkManager as a management tool for virtualization server and
guest configurations concerns me: it's oversized for the small needs
of virtualization guests, and has never worked well in production
environments in my experience.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Nico Kadel-Garcia]

On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Ross Walker  wrote:

> There is XenServer from Citrix and I think there is a community version too.
>
> -Ross

I'd welcome your opinion. I did a bunch of integration with
CentOS/RHEL 4 with the older, open source Xen utilities.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Stephen Harris]

On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 10:12:09PM -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Ross Walker  wrote:
> 
> > There is XenServer from Citrix and I think there is a community version too.
> >
> > -Ross
> 
> I'd welcome your opinion. I did a bunch of integration with
> CentOS/RHEL 4 with the older, open source Xen utilities.

This is slightly out of date now, but I evalauted a few virtualization
systems, including XenServer:
  http://sweh.spuddy.org/Essays/Virtualization_options.html

-- 

rgds
Stephen
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Nico Kadel-Garcia]

On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Stephen Harris  wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 10:12:09PM -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>> On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Ross Walker  wrote:
>>
>> > There is XenServer from Citrix and I think there is a community version 
>> > too.
>> >
>> > -Ross
>>
>> I'd welcome your opinion. I did a bunch of integration with
>> CentOS/RHEL 4 with the older, open source Xen utilities.
>
> This is slightly out of date now, but I evalauted a few virtualization
> systems, including XenServer:
>  http://sweh.spuddy.org/Essays/Virtualization_options.html

Now, *that* is what reviews should be like. Clear side by side
comparisons on the performance, features, and missing bits you need to
do yourself, very useful. It is a bit out of date: I hope you get a
chance to try the same tests with CentOS 6.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Les Mikesell]

On 12/19/10 9:33 AM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Stephen Harris  wrote:
>> On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 10:12:09PM -0500, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
>>> On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Ross Walker  wrote:
>>>
 There is XenServer from Citrix and I think there is a community version 
 too.

 -Ross
>>>
>>> I'd welcome your opinion. I did a bunch of integration with
>>> CentOS/RHEL 4 with the older, open source Xen utilities.
>>
>> This is slightly out of date now, but I evalauted a few virtualization
>> systems, including XenServer:
>>   http://sweh.spuddy.org/Essays/Virtualization_options.html
>
> Now, *that* is what reviews should be like. Clear side by side
> comparisons on the performance, features, and missing bits you need to
> do yourself, very useful. It is a bit out of date: I hope you get a
> chance to try the same tests with CentOS 6.

But the ESXi version isn't exactly fair to someone who would deploy on the 
hardware intended.  Also, the restriction to 1 CPU isn't built-in - there's a 
place where you select the number of CPUs you will use when you are registering 
for the free license.  I don't know what the actual maximum is, but it is at 
least 2 with a fairly large number of cores.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[John R Pierce]

On 12/19/10 8:40 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
> But the ESXi version isn't exactly fair to someone who would deploy on the
> hardware intended.  Also, the restriction to 1 CPU isn't built-in - there's a
> place where you select the number of CPUs you will use when you are 
> registering
> for the free license.  I don't know what the actual maximum is, but it is at
> least 2 with a fairly large number of cores.

I'm running the free ESXI on a 4-socket (single core opteron) server, no 
problems with the licensing, and I don't recall it asking how many cores 
per socket, just how many sockets.


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Drew]

I can confirm the socket/cpu limitation is at least 8, at least on
ESXi 3.x. I have an 8 core IBM x445 running on a free license. :-)

-- 
Drew

On 12/19/2010, John R Pierce  wrote:
> On 12/19/10 8:40 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>
>> But the ESXi version isn't exactly fair to someone who would deploy on the
>> hardware intended.  Also, the restriction to 1 CPU isn't built-in -
>> there's a
>> place where you select the number of CPUs you will use when you are
>> registering
>> for the free license.  I don't know what the actual maximum is, but it is
>> at
>> least 2 with a fairly large number of cores.
>
> I'm running the free ESXI on a 4-socket (single core opteron) server, no
> problems with the licensing, and I don't recall it asking how many cores
> per socket, just how many sockets.
>
>
> ___
> CentOS mailing list
> CentOS@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device

Drew

"Nothing in life is to be feared. It is only to be understood."
--Marie Curie
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Ross Walker]

On Dec 21, 2010, at 9:41 AM, Drew  wrote:

> 
> 
> On 12/19/2010, John R Pierce  wrote:
>> On 12/19/10 8:40 AM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>> 
>>> But the ESXi version isn't exactly fair to someone who would deploy on the
>>> hardware intended.  Also, the restriction to 1 CPU isn't built-in -
>>> there's a
>>> place where you select the number of CPUs you will use when you are
>>> registering
>>> for the free license.  I don't know what the actual maximum is, but it is
>>> at
>>> least 2 with a fairly large number of cores.
>> 
>> I'm running the free ESXI on a 4-socket (single core opteron) server, no
>> problems with the licensing, and I don't recall it asking how many cores
>> per socket, just how many sockets.
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> CentOS mailing list
>> CentOS@centos.org
>> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>> 
> I can confirm the socket/cpu limitation is at least 8, at least on
> ESXi 3.x. I have an 8 core IBM x445 running on a free license. :-)

The free and essentials licensing is restricted to max 2 sockets, max 6 cores a 
socket.

-Ross

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Drew]

>> I can confirm the socket/cpu limitation is at least 8, at least on
>> ESXi 3.x. I have an 8 core IBM x445 running on a free license. :-)
>
> The free and essentials licensing is restricted to max 2 sockets, max 6 cores 
> a socket.

The vSphere Essentials license is limited to 3 servers of 2 sockets w/
6core CPU's each. I have two sites right now running on licensed
editions.

The ESX/ESXi host is limited to a maximum of 32 logical (sockets x
cores x hyperthreading) CPUs. The free license only allows access
through the vSphere client and all other features such as
vMotion/vStorage/HA are disabled. Otherwise the host's hardware limits
are the same.



-- 
Drew

"Nothing in life is to be feared. It is only to be understood."
--Marie Curie
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Alexander Dalloz]

>>> I can confirm the socket/cpu limitation is at least 8, at least on
>>> ESXi 3.x. I have an 8 core IBM x445 running on a free license. :-)
>>
>> The free and essentials licensing is restricted to max 2 sockets, max 6
>> cores a socket.
>
> The vSphere Essentials license is limited to 3 servers of 2 sockets w/
> 6core CPU's each. I have two sites right now running on licensed
> editions.

Correct.

> The ESX/ESXi host is limited to a maximum of 32 logical (sockets x
> cores x hyperthreading) CPUs. The free license only allows access
> through the vSphere client and all other features such as
> vMotion/vStorage/HA are disabled. Otherwise the host's hardware limits
> are the same.

All the nifty VMware features are technically bound to the existance and
functioning of a vCenter Server. It's all controlled by it and without one
(reboot, failure, whatever) the VMs will go on running but no vMotion, HA
or DRS will work. This is the case for whatever vSphere product and
feature set you choose. Of course, beyond the 60 days trial period the
vCenter Server must be licensed as well the required number of physical
CPUs.

The named vSphere Essentials license does not cover vMotion and HA, not to
speak about Storage vMotion. Neccessary to choose at least vSphere
Essentials Plus.



> Drew

Alexander



___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Les Mikesell]

On 12/23/2010 10:02 AM, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
>
>> The ESX/ESXi host is limited to a maximum of 32 logical (sockets x
>> cores x hyperthreading) CPUs. The free license only allows access
>> through the vSphere client and all other features such as
>> vMotion/vStorage/HA are disabled. Otherwise the host's hardware limits
>> are the same.
>
> All the nifty VMware features are technically bound to the existance and
> functioning of a vCenter Server. It's all controlled by it and without one
> (reboot, failure, whatever) the VMs will go on running but no vMotion, HA
> or DRS will work. This is the case for whatever vSphere product and
> feature set you choose. Of course, beyond the 60 days trial period the
> vCenter Server must be licensed as well the required number of physical
> CPUs.
>
> The named vSphere Essentials license does not cover vMotion and HA, not to
> speak about Storage vMotion. Neccessary to choose at least vSphere
> Essentials Plus.
>
> 

To put this back in the context of comparison to other free virtual host 
servers, you can run the console client (windows app) to connect to as 
many ESXi servers as you want, but on a one to one basis. That is, open 
a new instance of the client for each connection, and within those you 
can open consoles to as many VM guests as you want (although once the 
network is up I usually prefer to use vnc or NX/freenx directly to the 
guest).  The licensed vCenter stuff refers to a single app that is 
simultaneously aware of all of your ESXi servers and their guests and 
can move/fail resources across servers - concepts that I don't think the 
other hypervisors even have.

I don't think there is an overall restriction on how many of the free 
ESXi servers you install - you just have to treat them as standalone 
instances.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[Rajagopal Swaminathan]

Greetings,

On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Les Mikesell  wrote:
> On 12/23/2010 10:02 AM, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
> The licensed vCenter stuff refers to a single app that is
> simultaneously aware of all of your ESXi servers and their guests and
> can move/fail resources across servers - concepts that I don't think the
> other hypervisors even have.

Duh.. What is RHEV then?

I am in front of the box now. Can you tell me which feature is
missing? if any, perhaps we can raise a point with redhat.

Regards,

Rajagopal
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] Intel NIC

[David Sommerseth]

On 24/12/10 06:35, Rajagopal Swaminathan wrote:
> Greetings,
> 
> On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Les Mikesell  wrote:
>> On 12/23/2010 10:02 AM, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
>> The licensed vCenter stuff refers to a single app that is
>> simultaneously aware of all of your ESXi servers and their guests and
>> can move/fail resources across servers - concepts that I don't think the
>> other hypervisors even have.
> 
> Duh.. What is RHEV then?
>
> I am in front of the box now. Can you tell me which feature is
> missing? if any, perhaps we can raise a point with redhat.

Maybe this one answers some of your questions ...



kind regards,

David Sommerseth

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

[CentOS] intel nic vanished with 5.3

[Tom Brown]

Hi

I have boxes with a quad card that shows up with

e1000 e1000_probe: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection

However since rebuilding a box from 4.7 to 5.3 this card has vanished - 
I would have thought this card is pretty generic so i dont believe there 
are not drivers for it -

Any other thoughts? It does not show up at all in messages etc, and 
ethtool knows nothing of it either.

thanks
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] intel nic vanished with 5.3

[nate]

Tom Brown wrote:
> Hi
>
> I have boxes with a quad card that shows up with
>
> e1000 e1000_probe: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
>
> However since rebuilding a box from 4.7 to 5.3 this card has vanished -
> I would have thought this card is pretty generic so i dont believe there
> are not drivers for it -
>
> Any other thoughts? It does not show up at all in messages etc, and
> ethtool knows nothing of it either.

try modprobe e1000 and see if it comes back? (there's also the
e1000e driver as well I think that is for the latest cards mostly
PCIe)

Check lspci to verify it's still there?

nate


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] intel nic vanished with 5.3

[Tom Brown]

>
> try modprobe e1000 and see if it comes back? (there's also the
> e1000e driver as well I think that is for the latest cards mostly
> PCIe)
>
>   

Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Driver - version 7.3.20-k2-NAPI
Copyright (c) 1999-2006 Intel Corporation.


> Check lspci to verify it's still there?
>
>   

# lspci
00:06.0 PCI bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] AMD-8111 PCI (rev 07)
00:07.0 ISA bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] AMD-8111 LPC (rev 05)
00:07.1 IDE interface: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] AMD-8111 IDE (rev 03)
00:07.3 Bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] AMD-8111 ACPI (rev 05)
00:0a.0 PCI bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] AMD-8131 PCI-X Bridge 
(rev 12)
00:0a.1 PIC: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] AMD-8131 PCI-X IOAPIC (rev 01)
00:0b.0 PCI bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] AMD-8131 PCI-X Bridge 
(rev 12)
00:0b.1 PIC: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] AMD-8131 PCI-X IOAPIC (rev 01)
00:18.0 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] 
HyperTransport Technology Configuration
00:18.1 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] 
Address Map
00:18.2 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] 
DRAM Controller
00:18.3 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] 
Miscellaneous Control
00:19.0 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] 
HyperTransport Technology Configuration
00:19.1 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] 
Address Map
00:19.2 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] 
DRAM Controller
00:19.3 Host bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] K8 [Athlon64/Opteron] 
Miscellaneous Control
01:00.0 USB Controller: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] AMD-8111 USB (rev 0b)
01:00.1 USB Controller: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] AMD-8111 USB (rev 0b)
01:05.0 VGA compatible controller: Trident Microsystems Blade 3D PCI/AGP 
(rev 3a)
02:02.0 Ethernet controller: Broadcom Corporation NetXtreme BCM5704 
Gigabit Ethernet (rev 03)
02:02.1 Ethernet controller: Broadcom Corporation NetXtreme BCM5704 
Gigabit Ethernet (rev 03)
02:04.0 SCSI storage controller: LSI Logic / Symbios Logic 53c1030 PCI-X 
Fusion-MPT Dual Ultra320 SCSI (rev 08)

so the OS cant see the card at all

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] intel nic vanished with 5.3

[Frank Cox]

On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 18:11:13 +0100
Tom Brown wrote:

> so the OS cant see the card at all

Are you sure it's still there?Try re-seating it, or move it to a different
slot and see if anything changes.

-- 
MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Melville Sask ~ http://www.melvilletheatre.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] intel nic vanished with 5.3

[nate]

Tom Brown wrote:

> so the OS cant see the card at all


Maybe an IRQ conflict or something? I don't recall ever
seeing a situation where lspci wouldn't show a device that
was actually present and working. Try a different PCI
slot?

nate


___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

Re: [CentOS] intel nic vanished with 5.3

[Tom Brown]

>
> Maybe an IRQ conflict or something? I don't recall ever
> seeing a situation where lspci wouldn't show a device that
> was actually present and working. Try a different PCI
> slot?
>
>   

yes its rather odd - i will ask the DC guys to check but i am working on 
second hand info regarding this card being present so i'll just have to 
see what they say.

i have never seen something like this either.

thanks
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos