Hyper-V as a service
-
@JaredBusch said:
@BRRABill said:
So to shutdown the VMs, you would need the 5P which sends the shutdown signal over the network to the software sitting on each VM.
This is not how that works.
You tell Hyper-V Server to shut down. That is all. The Hyper-V server will correctly handle the guest VM's based on the settings you specified for each VM.
OK, someone who's brand new to hypervisors might not know that.. good post.
-
@Dashrender said:
The whole situation that you can get a GUI based install to work in something that it's suppose to have a GUI just weirds me out!
How is this suppose to be so much lighter when the stuff that makes GUI windows work is still clearly there?
I agree that it's nothing more than myself boxing myself into incorrect assumption (something that most of us do) - Hey this is GUI-less, therefore anything that requires GUI interaction (at least for install) won't work.
@JaredBusch ... That was my confusion, exactly.
As someone who has ALWAYS used a GUI, the concept of Server Core (or even just straight Hyper-V Server, which I assume has even less interfacing options than Server Core) meant that you could not run any of these GUI graphics-based programs.
I agree with @Dashrender ...what's the point of running a stripped down GUI-less server if you can still run all the programs like normal?
But that's just me talking from inexperience with non-GUI servers.
-
@Dashrender said:
@JaredBusch said:
OK, someone who's brand new to hypervisors might not know that.. good post.That I actually knew. And was my plan exactly.
Then I thought I had an aha moment because I thought you could not run a GUI-based program to manage it. And it made sense what Eaton was saying.
I do admit to totally neglecting to think about the UPS management built into the OS. But to be honest, I have never used that. I've always used the more full featured software that comes with the UPS.
-
@BRRABill said:
@Dashrender said:
@JaredBusch said:
OK, someone who's brand new to hypervisors might not know that.. good post.That I actually knew. And was my plan exactly.
Then I thought I had an aha moment because I thought you could not run a GUI-based program to manage it. And it made sense what Eaton was saying.
I do admit to totally neglecting to think about the UPS management built into the OS. But to be honest, I have never used that. I've always used the more full featured software that comes with the UPS.
What UPS management software built into the OS? Never, not even once, did I even insinuate anything about the built in OS UPS management options.
-
@JaredBusch said:
What UPS management software built into the OS? Never, not even once, did I even insinuate anything about the built in OS UPS management options.
It wasn't you who said that.
-
@BRRABill said:
Is that available non GUI?
Assuming it is, and that you would know how.
Since around 2008, MS has made a huge point that every MS function is available through the command line. In the NT4 and Windows 2000 era, GUI was king and CLI was the secondary. That changed long ago, somewhere between 2003 and 2008. MS Policy is that nothing can be GUI only. Remember, even MS recommends GUIless systems when possible.
-
@Dashrender said:
I agree that it's nothing more than myself boxing myself into incorrect assumption (something that most of us do) - Hey this is GUI-less, therefore anything that requires GUI interaction (at least for install) won't work.
Many Linux installs (not mine, but many) have the GUI libraries there but no GUI running. Meaning that the code is around but the services don't run. So the attack surface remains small and the CPU and memory are not being used unnecessarily but if you need to fire something up with a GUI, you can.
In the Linux world, we do "minimal" server installs and don't install those libraries. But lots of people go for more bloated installs that have that stuff there.
