Home > Articles > Operating Systems, Server > Linux/UNIX/Open Source

  • Print
  • + Share This
This chapter is from the book

This chapter is from the book

Comparison with Other Virtualization Technologies

UML differs from other virtualization technologies in being more of a virtual operating system (OS) rather than a virtual machine. In spite of this, I will stick to the common terminology and call UML a virtual machine technology rather than a virtual OS, which would be somewhat more accurate.

Technologies such as VMWare really are virtual machines. They emulate a physical platform, from the CPU to the peripherals, well enough that any OS that runs on the physical platform also runs on the emulated platform provided by VMWare. This has the advantage that it is fairly OS-agnostic—in principle, any OS that runs on the platform can boot under VMWare. In contrast, UML can be only a Linux guest. On the other hand, being a virtual OS rather than a virtual machine allows UML to interact more fully with the host OS, which has advantages we will see later.

Other virtualization technologies such as Xen, BSD jail, Solaris zones, and chroot are integrated into the host OS, as opposed to UML, which runs in a process. This gives UML the advantage of being independent from the host OS version, at the cost of some performance. However, a lot (maybe all) of this performance can be regained without losing the flexibility and manageability that UML gains from being in userspace.

As we will see later, the benefits of virtualization accrue largely from the degree of isolation between users and processes inside the virtual machine or jail and those outside it. Most of these technologies (excluding Xen and VMWare) provide only partial virtualization and, thus, partial isolation.

The least complete virtualization is provided by chroot, which only jails processes into a directory. In all other respects, the processes are unconfined. Even then, on Linux, chroot can't confine a process with root privileges, since its design allows superuser processes to escape.

BSD jail and vserver (a Linux-based project with roughly the same properties) provide stronger confinement. They confine processes to a subset of the filesystem and don't allow them to see processes outside the jail. A jail is also restricted to using a single IP address, and it can't manipulate its firewall rules. Jailed processes are not restricted in their use of CPU time or I/O. The jails on a system are implemented within the system's kernel and therefore share the kernel, along with the bugs and security holes it contains. The inability to change firewall rules is a consequence of incomplete virtualization, as is the requirement to share the kernel with the host.

Solaris zones are much closer to full-blown virtual machines and complete isolation. Processes within a zone can't see outside files or processes, as is the case with a jail. Zones have their own logical devices, with some restrictions on their access to the network. For example, raw access to packets isn't allowed. A zone can be assigned a certain number of shares within the global fair share scheduler, limiting the share of CPU that the processes within a zone can consume. We will see this concept later in the form of virtual processors in a multiprocessor virtual machine. Zones, like the other technologies described so far, are implemented within the kernel and share the kernel version and configuration with each other and the host.

Finally, technologies such as VMWare, Xen, and UML implement full virtualization and isolation. They all have fully virtualized devices with no restrictions on how they may be used. They also confine their processes with respect to CPU consumption by virtue of having a certain number of virtual processors they may use. They also all run separate instances of the OS, which may be different versions (and even a completely different OS in the case of VMWare) than the host.

  • + Share This
  • 🔖 Save To Your Account