[CentOS] xen vs kvm for virtualization on centos/rhel?
Mathieu Baudier
mbaudier at argeo.orgMon Aug 9 19:30:20 UTC 2010
- Previous message: [CentOS] xen vs kvm for virtualization on centos/rhel?
- Next message: [CentOS] xen vs kvm for virtualization on centos/rhel?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> I recommend using VirtualBOX from Sun. Close to wire speed, no need to alter > the kernel. Simple and flexible to use. I use VirtualBox on customer sites in order to virtualize a CentOS instance because it runs on Windows during the implementation phase, and then we can easily sneak it on their Solaris servers when it goes in production. I would never have been able to introduce a Linux over there without Virtual Box... It works mostly fine and is the best FLOSS solution I have seen for desktop virtualization, but I don't find it rock-solid and they tend to release very often with significant changes. It feels like a Fedora rather than a CentOS, if you see what I mean. But updates have become much easier to follow since they set up a yum repository. As per the OP question, I started preparing a virtualized infrastructure with CentOS 5 hosts (and guests) approximately one year ago and went the KVM way for the reason already described (mostly that it seems to be Red Hat long-term strategy). I never had any issue with KVM/QEMU/libvirt (so far...) and it is very easy to automate with virsh and the XML configurations (just as Xen I guess).
- Previous message: [CentOS] xen vs kvm for virtualization on centos/rhel?
- Next message: [CentOS] xen vs kvm for virtualization on centos/rhel?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the CentOS mailing list