Comparison of Virtualisation technologies readily available at CERN and their potential to be used to replace VNode

Requirements

• As quick as possible from 'assign to usable'
• Easy to maintain updates
• Must support the following OS
  • Scientific Linux 4 (32 / 64 bit), 5 (64 bit) [priority - Others can be best effort basis]
  • Current SLC version(s)
  • Debian 4 (and 5)
  • Fedora (latest)
• Access controls
• CLI
• FIXME with others...

CERN CVI

See http://cern.ch/cvi - Centrally provided service by IT. Runs on windows.

Good Points

• Not our maintenance hassle
• Under development so interface can possibly be extended
• '30 days free'
• ability to choose hostname for virt machine
• can be 'extended' indefinately (on provision of a budget code
• SOAP access possible to provision

Bad Points

• can take 20 mins from provisioning on web page to getting a machine
• Only SLC images (and windows) images available (option to specify own not working)
• Javascript-heavy webpage often not working in FF (show machine status etc)
• as it registers the hostname in DNS, you needed a delay before reprovisioning the same machine (had to wait till netdb flushed)

Overall Verdict:

• Not (yet) suitable for replacing existing vnode. Possibly with CLI and own images it would match functionality. have not tested building a grid cluster of virtual machines (ie, UI+CE+Batch+WNs) and checking how they interact.

VNode

Good Points

• Stable web interface
• CLI available (though it needs improvements)
• Already done full-integration with the requirements

Bad Points

• Yet Another Home-made tool to maintain

Overall Verdict

VirtualBox

Good Points

• No servers needed
• Can work from home or any other place easily

Bad Points

• Difficulty to configure it appropriately (certificates, dns, etc.)

Overall Verdict

TBD

Good Points

Bad Points

Overall Verdict

-- AndrewElwell - 18-Jan-2010