Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

IBM Reveals New Virtual Linux Environment

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Mon Apr 23, 2007 04:25 PM
from the pave-the-way dept.
jenwren1010 writes to mention that IBM has just announced the new open beta version of their virtual Linux environment that allows users to run x86 Linux programs on POWER processor-based IBM System p servers. "Designed to reduce power, cooling and space by consolidating x86 Linux workloads on System p servers, it will eventually be released as the [rolls-off-the-tongue] 'IBM System p Application Virtual Environment (System p AVE).' With a 31.5% global revenue share during 2006, IBM hopes to build on System p UNIX success and extend firmly into the Linux marketplace. Considering there are almost 2,800 applications that already run natively on Linux on System p servers, the chances are good that it will succeed."

Related Stories

[+] Games: IBM to Regulate Employee Second Life Behavior 165 comments
mytrip writes "In hopes of avoiding potentially embarrassing incidents, IBM is taking the unusual step of establishing official guidelines for its more than 5,000 employees who inhabit Second Life and other virtual worlds. 'IBM appears to be the first corporation to create rules governing virtual worlds. The move has critics, who say that mandating behavior for the so-called "metaverse" is unlikely to reform impish avatars. They also question why IBM would add a layer of buttoned-down bureaucracy to this relatively rollicking corner of the Internet. IBM executives counter that having a code of conduct is akin to a corporate stamp of approval, encouraging workers to explore more than 100 worlds IBM collectively calls the 3D Internet.'" This regulation may be coming from more than self-interest: IBM sees these environments as management training courses in some ways; working inter-personal skills via chat and human resources via guild activities.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • What's the point? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Ed Avis (5917) <ed@membled.com> on Monday April 23 2007, @04:32PM (#18845873)
    (http://membled.com/)
    I don't get it, aren't almost all Linux programs able to build for pretty much any architecture? The only use for emulation would be binary-only proprietary software that's built for x86 only. And even there it should be pretty trivial for the vendor to port it to POWER.
    • Re:What's the point? by timeOday (Score:3) Monday April 23 2007, @04:36PM
    • Re:What's the point? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Biggerveggies (517226) on Monday April 23 2007, @04:40PM (#18846015)
      The point is that you can run a unified infrastructure with scalable LPARS for different clients on one box (think p595).

      ie - the marketing term: "Power on Demand".
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:What's the point? by Tinkster (Score:2) Monday April 23 2007, @05:34PM
        • Re:What's the point? (Score:4, Informative)

          by Chanc_Gorkon (94133) <gorkon@gmai[ ]om ['l.c' in gap]> on Monday April 23 2007, @06:12PM (#18847183)
          Some good points, however the term big iron should not be applied here. Big iron would be a mainframe. Pseries machines are very powerful, however, they are very different in technology then a mainframe. They are a hybridization of technology that IBM built with POWER and of Mainframe like techn0ologies.

          This is a great idea. With micro partitioning on the pSeries and automatic load balancing, us pSeries admins don't need to learn VMware to run a farm of x86 based servers. Also, while most things are running on POWER already, sometimes it's not convenient to find binaries that will run on it plus how many of us have a spare pSeries machine just for compiles?? Also, there's a metric tone of commercial apps that run on x86 Linux and not many of them that run on PPC based distros.
          [ Parent ]
      • Re:What's the point? by glwtta (Score:2) Monday April 23 2007, @07:07PM
    • Re:What's the point? by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Monday April 23 2007, @04:51PM
      • Re:What's the point? by Ed Avis (Score:2) Monday April 23 2007, @04:57PM
        • Re:What's the point? by C_Kode (Score:2) Monday April 23 2007, @05:09PM
        • Re:What's the point? (Score:4, Informative)

          Yeah I originally thought it was a compatibility layer that would let you run x86/Linux apps on POWER/AIX, but I don't think it's quite that.

          From TFA:

          IBM expects ISVs that don't already have a native Linux on POWER product to be able to expand their addressable market to System p servers at minimal cost by allowing them to run their existing x86 Linux applications on these servers without having to recompile, release new media or documentation, or maintain a unique product offering for POWER technology.
          So basically it's a way of taking x86/Linux binaries and running them on POWER/Linux without a recompile. (And, one assumes, if you're an end-user, without going back to the software's manufacturer and paying through the nose for a new POWER version; you can move from x86 to POWER and still use all your same apps, without buying new versions.)
          [ Parent ]
      • Re:What's the point? by red crab (Score:1) Tuesday April 24 2007, @04:04AM
    • Re:What's the point? by Gooner (Score:3) Monday April 23 2007, @07:30PM
    • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 23 2007, @04:32PM (#18845881)
    I think it's pretty cocky of IBM to do this while the SCO case is still before the courts. It may be a case of the hand that steals not knowing what the hand that conceals is doing This time it might get a slap!

    I recommend SCOX. It's a BUY.

    T_A
  • but does it run linux? (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 23 2007, @04:32PM (#18845883)
    what?
  • Power Saving? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by hawg2k (628081) on Monday April 23 2007, @04:33PM (#18845893)
    (http://localhost:8080/)
    It's been my experience that IBM's power architecture isn't really known for being "green". Can anyone provide some expertise behind the statement that running Linux VM's on the P hardware will really save energy in heating and cooling over other concepts like a rack of 1-U rack servers, a VMWare/Xen type solution on x86 hardware, or some type of blade solution?
    • Re:Power Saving? by cgh4be (Score:1) Monday April 23 2007, @04:38PM
    • Re:Power Saving? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Chanc_Gorkon (94133) <gorkon@gmai[ ]om ['l.c' in gap]> on Monday April 23 2007, @06:18PM (#18847263)
      You can buy ONE rack and it has 64 processors in it. Each of those 64 processors can be sheared down to 1/10th of a CPU partition. That would be 640 servers in one rack. Granted, you'd never want to run that many LPARS on a system, but you could come close. You can also share all 64 of these processors and each of the LPARS can look like a SMP system by setting a VP of 2 or higher. Granted alot of this will need proper tuning, but you can do a lot with a pSeries and shove alot of hardware into one rack. Also, with Partition Load manager, it can very how much CPU each partition gets by the load it's getting. Say one of the LPARS gets nailed all of a sudden. If the partition is uncapped or not reached it's cap, it can automatically grab as much CPU as needed.

      The pSeries machine CAN do what they describe.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Power Saving? by UndiFineD (Score:1) Tuesday April 24 2007, @04:25AM
  • by no_pets (881013) on Monday April 23 2007, @04:37PM (#18845965)
    I never understood the push for Linux on iSeries or pSeries. To me, if you want 'nix on pSeries just run AIX.
  • This is the point. (Score:4, Informative)

    by HockeyPuck (141947) on Monday April 23 2007, @04:42PM (#18846051)
    In the current generation of Power CPUs, you can implement micropartitions, akin to "this partition uses .1 CPUs", which if you've got spare computational power available on your AIX system, you could create additional partitions for X86 use. Also, since the partitions have the ability to communicate directly with each other without going over an external network, you could have in one chassis an AIX database with a linux based webserver in different partitions, both sharing the same fibrechannel cards and external gigE/10Gig network connections.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 23 2007, @04:52PM (#18846193)
    Transitive has a news article ... it's them again, same tech provider as Apple uses for their Rosetta product (obviously, reverse of the technology, Intel -> PPC, instead of PPC -> Intel).

    http://transitive.com/news/news_20070423.htm [transitive.com]
  • More details (Score:5, Informative)

    by aktzin (882293) on Monday April 23 2007, @05:18PM (#18846549)
    The article and press release don't say much, but I found this announcement on the IBM web site: http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/p/linux/systempave.h tml [ibm.com]

    At the bottom are some good details:

    "Runs most x86 Linux applications except those that * Directly access HW; * Are hardware architecture specific; * Provide unique kernel modules; or * Use instructions added later than the Pentium II processor, e.g. SSE2."

    "All application components and plug-ins must meet these qualifications. Support for x86 Linux applications requires an Red Hat 4 update 4 or Novell SLES 9 with Service Pack 3 of the Linux operating system."

  • Why, we could even load them with Ubuntu ...
  • by PaulBu (473180) on Monday April 23 2007, @05:32PM (#18846731)
    (http://slashdot.org/)
    As far as I remember one of the original goals of PPC architecture in the times of original IBM/Moto/Apple consortium 15 years ago was to be able to emulate "other" (x86, maybe? ;-) ) processors efficiently. Strangely I have not heard about something like this being actually used up until today! (Yes, I know that POWER != PPC, but I think the parts are still there).

    Paul B.
  • by SleepyHappyDoc (813919) on Monday April 23 2007, @06:15PM (#18847223)
    Xbox 360 is PowerPC, right? Is that similar enough to get any benefit from this?
  • by Zanthrox (835290) on Monday April 23 2007, @10:57PM (#18849827)
    Wonder how this compares to em86? I recall mention of that a few years back as a way to run x86 linux apps on alpha cpus. Not sure DEC/Compaq/HP ever released the source to the x86 execution engine, but em86 was pretty cool back in the day nonetheless..
  • by Jay Carlson (28733) on Tuesday April 24 2007, @02:08AM (#18851295)
    Regardless of how practical this is, it's an awesome checkbox feature for corporate weenies advocating the POWER architecture superminis with no clue about their true strengths.

    "Look, this machine is so powerful it can run qemu user-mode emulation of another processor in its spare time! Let's see your Dell cluster emulate an x86!"
  • woohoo (Score:1)

    by DanJ_UK (980165) * on Tuesday April 24 2007, @02:10PM (#18859689)
    AVE' IT!
  • by magellan (33560) on Tuesday April 24 2007, @04:19PM (#18861755)
    This is not an IBM technology, but instead is based on a technology developed by Transitive.

    It would be much more useful if IBM would offer the version of Transitive software which allows POWER applications to run on x86 systems, rather than the reverse. The only thing which makes sense to run on a emulator on a IBM POWER system would be a mainframe environment.

    Why emulate the most mass-produced CPU instruction set ever, given the ISA is still in mass production? Why emulate the cheap volume processor on a more expensive, proprietary platform? The reverse makes much more sense. The more expensive, more closed architecture should be emulated on the less expensive, more open platform.

    I fail to understand what value running x86 Linux apps on POWER provides. Intel Woodcrest and AMD Opteron provide great 64-bit performance, the AMD/Intel competition keeps prices dirt cheap and innovation moving at light-speed, and VMware provides fine-grained virtualization. And just like the AMD/Intel war keeps processor prices low, the coming Xen/VMware war is going to cut the cost of virtualization.

    Emulators are needed to support customers on processor architectures which are dead. That is Alpha and PA-RISC. Next would be current platforms which customers want to move off of. That would be the Mainframe first, then Itanium, and after that perhaps SPARC and POWER.

    There are clearly some weird politics going on at Transitive.

    HP's partnership with Transitive is not focused on taking care of HP's own Alpha and PA-RISC customers, but instead on offering a SPARC on Itanium emulator. HP does have a partnership with a mainframe emulator, which makes some sense, but why not offer consolidated hosting to your own existing customers first?

    IBM's partnership with Transitive is not focused on POWER or mainframe customers, but instead on offering an x86 on POWER emulator.

    I can never envision the business case for emulating the industry-standard x86 architecture on a proprietary RISC platform like IBM's POWER.

    I would love to see VMware buy Transitive and offer the ability to create Alpha, PA-RISC, Mainframe, Itanium, POWER, and SPARC VMs on ESX server. Of course if they did that, it would be EMC declaring war on the rest of the IT industry, but it would be a really cool product.
  • Re:Remember folks... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Constantine XVI (880691) <trash DOT eighty AT gmail DOT com> on Monday April 23 2007, @06:33PM (#18847411)
    umm, AT&T? Standard Oil? The Holy Roman Catholic Church?(sorta j/k on the last one)
    [ Parent ]
  • Re:Too late (Score:1)

    by joshuapurcell (714520) on Monday April 23 2007, @07:42PM (#18848105)
    Actually you are wrong. None of those applications allow you to run an x86 application while also running inside and a Power-based OS.
    [ Parent ]
    • Re:Too late by Lemming Mark (Score:3) Monday April 23 2007, @07:53PM
  • Re:Weeeee (Score:1)

    by website design (1093011) on Wednesday April 25 2007, @03:31AM (#18867481)
    I don't get it, aren't almost all Linux programs able to build for pretty much any architecture? For more on the subject you shall visit me at : ecommerce web site design [webdesigningcompany.net] The only use for emulation would be binary-only proprietary software that's built for x86 only. And even there it should be pretty trivial for the vendor to port it to POWER.
    [ Parent ]
  • 11 replies beneath your current threshold.