ESX Server with a controlling VM, as a replacement for workstation

[UlyssesOfEpirus]

Considering switching to ESX Server to increase the memory available to my internet-facing VM's. But, I have been advised ESX needs a second pc to control it. So it is no good as a replacement for workstation or even player.

Why can't a VM with host-only networking be used as the controlling computer in ESX, playing the role of the external controlling computer?

If it is declared with a raw disk it can even have full access to the host disk. You can then install vmware workstation in the VM just to edit .vmx files through the gui, generate new .vmdk's, or copy-paste entire VM's.

And when you need more memory, you suspend this controlling VM and almost all memory is available to internet-facing VM's.

Why not?

[continuum · Accepted solution]

ESX is a quite primitive Operating system - it can not even display a nice picture as it only has a text console.

Because it is so limited and restricted compaired with other operating systems it is so good at running VMs without graphical interface.

The drawback of this design is that you need a second machine to display the desktop of a VM

_________________________

VMX-parameters- WS FAQ -[ MOAcd|http://sanbarrow.com/moa241.html] - VMDK-Handbook

[UlyssesOfEpirus]

Thanks.