[Info-vax] WHY IS VSI REQUIRING A HYPERVISOR FOR X86 OPENVMS?

[D W]

On Thursday, December 31, 2020 at 12:07:41 PM UTC-5, Andrew Brehm wrote:
> On 21/12/2020 02:03, Michael C wrote:
> > On Sunday, December 20, 2020 at 1:00:41 PM UTC-5, ajb... at gmail.com wrote:
> >> On 18/12/2020 17:41, supers... at gmail.com wrote:
> >>> This adds more cost. Why can't it run by itself on x86?
> >>> Or am I misunderstanding that you do not have to buy vmware or some other
> >>> VM to run it?
> >>
> >> But I also don't see your point. In my experience bare metal
> >> requirements cost more money because you need to buy and support/install
> >> extra hardware for the platform. With a hypervisor you can just add
> >> OpenVMS instances on your existing hardware.
> >>
> >> Where I work every bare metal server is a hassle. VMs deploy
> >> automatically and there is no need to worry about the hardware. If the
> >> hardware fails, VMs are moved to or restarted on different hardware. An
> >> actual hypervisor _requirement_ would be perfect for us as it would cut
> >> down on support costs and time.
> > 
> > 1ST PROBLEM - RESTARTED
> > 
> > THERE ARE CUSTOMERS, MOST I WOULD THINK, WHO WANT 24/7 UPTIME THAT OPENVMS
> > OFFERS AND NOT THE REBOOT MINDSET OF WINDOZE AND LINUS USERS.
> 
> And you believe restarting a bare metal OpenVMS instance on another 
> server after a hardware failure would somehow solve that problem?
> 
> With vSphere you can move a running OpenVMS instance to another physical 
> server in case you notice the hardware problem coming. With a bare metal 
> instance you are limited to the situation you seem to think is a 
> particular problem of using a hypervisor.
> 
> >>
> >> But OpenVMS will, so they say, support both some HPE and Dell hardware
> >> and some hypervisors, and all the supported hypervisors are available as
> >> free editions as well as paid.
> >>
> >> While VirtualBox is not a production environment VMM, both KVM and
> >> vSphere are and all three can be free.
> >>
> >> You can then install OpenVMS on your HPE hardware or install a free ESXi
> >> on it or a free Linux with KVM and then OpenVMS. Where's the problem?
> >>
> > 
> > DOWNTIME ABOVE WAS THE FIRST.
> 
> The above was a win for the hypervisor. A bare metal instance would not 
> survive hardware failure, a VM can.
> 
> > 2ND PROBLEM - JOINING THE LINUX PATCH OF THE DAY CLUB
> > 
> > HERE IS THE OPENVMS CERT COUNTS AS OF 2018 COMPARE THEM WITH OTHER OSs - SEE THE PROBLEM?
> 
> No, I don't see the problem. How would Linux patches affect OpenVMS 
> running in a virtualised environment?
> 
> I'm not sure you understand virtualisation correctly.
> 
> -- 
> Andrew Brehm

I understand VMs just fine. The linux kernal is inherently flawed as is windoze.

As for hardware failures I would I think OpenVMS clustering is a far superior solution than the VM solution.