Which host operating system should I use

[moored99]

I want to build a Server based Virtual Box host with up to 3 x Server 2003 32/64 bit or Server 2008 32/64 bit virtual servers clients.

Would it be better to run Virtual box on Ubuntu x64 or Server 2003 x64 or Server 2008 x64

I want the best performance option.

[Perryg]

My 2 cents.
Depending on what you want to do the Ubuntu 64 Host would take the least amount of resources, or WinXPpro 64.
Using the Win 2003-2008 server 64 would require a lot of system resources just to host the VMs.

[moored99]

Thanks for the reply I was thinking that XP Pro 64 would be limited by the number of CPU's it can address, I am thinking of a server with 4 x Xeon's in a box.
Would Ubuntu 64 be able to manage 4 x 4 Xeon's each with 4 cores total 16 cores, and should I use the Desktop version for ease of setup or the server version.

[klingoncowboy4]

I am not sure about CPU numbers, and am admittedly unfamiliar with 64-bit specifically, but I would have thought that Xp would be inappropriate for a server. Personally I would prefer CentOS for a host in this case, but then I am rather a Red Hat fan.

As far as Windows goes I know from experience that the 32-bit version is many many times better in terms of performance and stability to the 32-bit version of Xp.

If I were to do this I would personally go for a Unix variant loaded in CLI (no graphical x environment) and just use VBoxManage. That way the host should be using as little resources as possible.

Whilst I would recommend Fedora in most cases I would steer clear of it in this case as it requires to many upgrades to be practical in a server environment (and is a bit bulkier than some distros).

VMWare's ESX uses a version of RHEL with a modified Kernal, so CentOS (based on RHEL) running in CLI should do the trick nicely.

[James Bond 007]

Thanks for the reply I was thinking that XP Pro 64 would be limited by the number of CPU's it can address, I am thinking of a server with 4 x Xeon's in a box.
Would Ubuntu 64 be able to manage 4 x 4 Xeon's each with 4 cores total 16 cores, and should I use the Desktop version for ease of setup or the server version.

While I am not absolutely sure, I would think that the desktop versions of Ubuntu x64 will not be able to support the configuration you want. Windows XP x64 probably won't either.

So for the host you may have to consider using Windows Server 2003 x64, or the server version of Ubuntu.

[baf]

For best performance I would recommend linux as host. Desktop or server doesn't matter so much as you can install the same in both. The difference is only what get's installed automatically. In Server you get extras like file sharing and such. In desktop you get office tools like openoffice and drawing programs. So pick which feels better for you but stay away from windows.

[JshWright]

That's some fairly substantial hardware. What's the application you're building this for?

Are you within the PUEL terms, or are you going to be using the OSE version? (Or buying a license)?

~JW

[moored99]

This is will be used for evaluation to prove concept and then if all goes well we will purchase a license depending on how much the license is and if to expensive I will be looking at alternatives.

Sun VirtualBox Premium Server Subscription (Price per Server per 4 Sockets), 1 Year $ 500.00

What exactly does 4 sockets mean (4 CPU's or 1 CPU with 4 cores) I will be running 1 server with 2 CPU'S and each CPU has 4 cores to run 3 Windows 2003 or 2008 and Ubuntu LAMP server. will the Prem Server Sub $ 500.00 cover my needs.