Am 28.07.11 11:23, schrieb Peter Peltonen:
Hi,
A few more questions :)
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 11:56 AM, John R. Dennisonjrd@gerdesas.com wrote:
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:53:23AM +0200, Juergen Gotteswinter wrote:
i think i am not the only one who wants to stay with with xen :)
Far from it. Xen still has a place as a dom0.
What are the reasons for people staying with Xen as dom0, just the learning curve? Or are there some technical considerations as well?
Are there any good migration guides from xen to KVM?
Can xen domUs be used with KVM easily?
I am myself wondering should I learn KVM and go with C6 dom0 or to stick with C5 for now...
BR, Peter _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
my experiences with KVM
- overcomittmend possible -> very bad in lots of producation systems - vms run as qemu process which take often lots of more memory then assigned to the vm, which could result in swapping (qemu overhead? dunno...) - performance Issues, espacially io - cli tools arent as easy to use than xm / xl
from my point i whould say kvm is great for desktop virtualization, but i whould stay away from it when it comes to server usage. for desktop stuff, xen is bad. For example the nvidia modules wont work with a dom0, with kvm they do.
the administration tools (virt-manager) run also on X...
pro points for xen
- assigned memory for a VM means assigned memory. not more will be used. - no overcommitment possible - great performance, especially with pv guests
con points for xen
- patched kernel needed (ok, 3.0 includes xen dom0 but not all features) - bad for desktop virtualization
just my to cents, others may have better experiences
cheers,
juergen