Question Virtual machines

[Rusty]

I would agree with that. Will test it in the near future as well but I think the problem will still be overall performance if you are running some additional services apart from VMM. Curious to test both 718 and 918 soon.

 

[oRBIT]

Using it via vnc or rdp?

I've tried both.

 

[Rusty]

Well, I have to agree on this. Comparing 918 and my 3614 in regards to VM speed and usage, 3614 is a far better choice. Still wondering how all will play out when 918 will be running with full SSD setup.

 

[itsjasper]

I would not put blame on Synology as they use what they could from open source (KVM/Redhat).

It is QEMU based, not KVM. So its a type-2 hypervisor running in userland running hardware virtualization, not kernel-space type-1 hardware-assisted virtualization.

Dynamic Binary translation on a Celeron CPU is never going to set speed records. Now, if Synology could get KVM running and use that for VMM, then we'd be seeing usable W10 VMs on a DS918.

source: What Is the Difference between QEMU and KVM?

 

[Edge]

It is QEMU based, not KVM. So its a type-2 hypervisor running in userland running hardware virtualization, not kernel-space type-1 hardware-assisted virtualization.

Dynamic Binary translation on a Celeron CPU is never going to set speed records. Now, if Synology could get KVM running and use that for VMM, then we'd be seeing usable W10 VMs on a DS918.

source: What Is the Difference between QEMU and KVM?

Thank you for correction and clarification. Yes, type-1 would be highly welcomed although it seems that Synology will stick with current solution. As we learned yesterday, on future follow-on models we can expect a very small increment in CPU department (still 4 core low-powered SoC Celeron) so nothing big there either.

 

[Coop777]

I am running a few VM's on an ISCSI LUN - don't have the need for them as much these days, my free VMWare licensing is out of date as well

 

[itsjasper]

As we learned yesterday, on future follow-on models we can expect a very small increment in CPU department (still 4 core low-powered SoC Celeron) so nothing big there either.

Yep, that's why I have a couple of NUCs running VMware, and just use the NAS as an NFS datastore. Even an old Gen6 i3 NUC is a decent upgrade from the Celeron J-series. A Skull Canyon NUC is even better, and they sit VERY nicely on top of a DS918, just saying.... ;-)

 

[Edge]

Sounds cozy. I was hoping to snatch NUC with 2 built-in NICs so it can host Untangle FW, but so far I fell short of finding one. There are some cheaper Chinese boxes (QOTOM) which looks OK, but I'd prefer something built with some active support.

 

[itsjasper]

Plenty of USB NICs around in both USB-A & USB-C flavours, then just run the VMware Fling for USB-LAN adaptors. perfectly fine for home lab and non-production use. The Realtek 8152-based models seem pretty solid under vSphere 6.7.