microservices unikernels portland state university cs
play

Microservices, Unikernels Portland State University CS 430P/530 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Virtual machines, Containers, Microservices, Unikernels Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems When en disks sks wer ere e flopp ppy.. .. WTH? Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web &


  1. Virtual machines, Containers, Microservices, Unikernels

  2. Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  3. When en disks sks wer ere e flopp ppy.. ..  WTH? Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  4. Sing ngle le pr process cess sy syst stem ems  Apple II, TRS-80  Single memory address space using real memory  Single CPU not shared  OS disk loads OS onto computer  OS loads program from another disk that takes over entire machine  Repeat entire sequence when you want to run another program Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  5.  How did it differ architecturally? Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  6. Mul ultipr tiprocess ocess shared red mem emory  Original Macintosh  Multiple processes and OS share CPU/memory  Explicit switching between processes  Still have a single, shared, real-memory address space Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  7. Issue…  Provides no isolation between apps and OS  Memory errors in one process can corrupt both the OS and other processes Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  8. How w did d th thes ese e sy syst stem ems s differ? er? Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  9. Mul ultipr tiprocess ocess virtual tual mem emory  IBM System 370 (1972), Windows NT (1993)  Operating system and hardware coordinate to provide virtual memory abstraction  Each process believes it owns all of real memory  OS implements a namespace for memory using PID  e.g. real addr = f(process ID, virtual addr)  Each process believes it owns the CPU  OS scheduler virtualizes CPU using process ID and stored CPU state  Transparent time-slicing of underlying CPU  All share underlying hardware through OS  Provides a “virtual computer” -ish abstraction Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  10. Multiprocess shared memory Multiprocess virtual memory (Real shared CPU/RAM/OS) (Virtual CPU/RAM, Real OS) Single process machines (Real CPU/RAM/OS) What resources are not virtualized in the OS? Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  11. Mul ultipr tiprocess ocess virtual tual mem emory y issue ues  Processes still share some operating system resources explicitly  File system  Networking ports  Users/groups  e.g. only memory has a name space (PID:VirtualAddress)  Security break in one application breaks others  Motivates… Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  12. Virtual tual Machin chine e (VMs) s)  Virtualize hardware to allow multiple operating systems to run  Like a name space for hardware resources  VM contains entire OS and application state  Virtualization layer multiplexes them onto underlying hardware  Virtualization (Hypervisor) Layer  Decouples OS from hardware  Enforces machine isolation and resource allocation between VMs  Each VM sees its own CPU, memory, network components, operating systems, and storage isolated from others (in theory… Spectre)  Hardware support via additions to x86 with Intel VT-x and AMD-V (2005) Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  13. Virtual tual ma machines hines  Ancient idea  Takes until 1999 before x86 gets its first hypervisor via VMware From IBM VM/370 product announcement, ca . 1972 2015 Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  14. Why virtu tualize alize?  Mail server, Database server, Web server all running different software stacks  Typically use a small percentage of resources on a single machine  Can get isolation of domains and better resource usage if multiplexed onto the same hardware using VMs  Prevent a compromise of one leading to a compromise of the other  On client…idea behind per-application VMs in QubesOS, Bromium Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  15. Types pes of hype pervis visor ors  Type-2 hypervisor  Host OS runs hypervisor (virtual machine monitor, virtualization layer)  Hypervisor runs independent guest VMs  Hypervisor traps privileged calls made by guest VMs and forwards them to host OS  Guest OSes must be hardware- compatible (e.g. can’t run an IBM AIX VM on your x86 laptop)  Examples: VMware Player, Virtual PC, VirtualBox, Parallels Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  16. Types pes of hype pervis visor ors  Type-1 (bare-metal) hypervisor  Removes underlying host OS  Hypervisor runs natively on hardware  Commonly used in data centers  Examples: KVM (used by GCP), Xen (used by AWS), Hyper-V (used by Azure), VMware ESXi Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  17. Multiprocess shared memory Multiprocess virtual memory (Real shared CPU/RAM/OS) (Virtual CPU/RAM, Real OS) Single process machines (Real CPU/RAM/OS) Virtual Machines (Virtual hardware, Real OS) Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  18. Iss ssue ues s wi with th VMs  Start-up time  Bringing VMs up and down requires OS boot process  Size  Entire OS and libraries replicated in memory and file system  Requires large amounts of resources (i.e. RAM) to multiplex guest OSes  Want isolation VMs provide without full replication of software stack  Not quite portable  VMs running on one cloud provider under one hypervisor can not be run on another cloud provider under a different one without modification  e.g. Moving an AWS EC2 instance to Google Compute Engine  Motivates… Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  19. Container tainers  Virtualize the operating system  So far  Traditional operating systems virtualize CPU and memory (e.g. processes)  Leave file-system and network shared amongst applications  Virtual machines virtualize hardware  Allows many types of guest OSes to run on a single machine (Windows, Linux) with complete separation  But, VM includes application, all of its libraries, and an entire operating system (10s of GB) Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  20. Container tainers  Virtualize the operating system  Container provides only application and its libraries running all in user-space  Operating system not replicated, but rather shared by containers  Each container sees its own virtual operating system  How? Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  21. Container tainer-enable enabled d OS OS (Linux nux 2008)  Provide name-spaces within kernel to isolate containers  Similar to PIDs providing namespace for virtual memory  But, virtualizes most of the rest (file system, network resources, etc).  Enforces isolation and performs resource allocation between containers  However, only compatible containers can run on top  e.g. only Linux containers can run on an underlying Linux OS Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  22. VMs s vs C s Cont ntainer ainers VM Container Container-enabled Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  23. Impl plementat ementation ion  Linux kernel provides “control groups” ( cgroups )  Introduced in 2008 (kernel 2.6.24)  Provide limits and prioritization of resources within OS per group  CPU, memory, block I/O, network, etc.  Done within OS instead of hypervisor  Namespace isolation via cgroups allows complete isolation of an applications' view of the operating environment  Separate process trees and PIDs  Separate networking system and sockets  Separate user IDs  Separate file systems (similar to chroot and BSD jails 2000)  Each associated with cgroup of container  Minimal replication costs in space/memory due to shared OS code Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  24. Be Benef efits its  Provides similar isolation and protection, but with lower overhead than VMs  Fast starting (better for autoscaling than VMs)  Memory footprint much smaller than a VM (can support 4-6x more)  Portable  Images contain all files and libraries needed to run  Runs the same on any compatible underlying OS  Repeatable  Runs the same regardless of where they are run  Runs on any cloud provider the same way  Solves the “works on my machine” problem (especially in courses!) Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

  25.  Unify Dev and Production environments  Can go straight from one to the other without modification  Trivial to on-board new developers docker run company/dev_environment Developers IT , Cloud Operations SHIP RUN BUILD Create & Store Deploy, Manage, Development Images Scale Environments Portland State University CS 430P/530 Internet, Web & Cloud Systems

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend