On 07/28/2011 11:49 AM, Juergen Gotteswinter wrote: > 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. Dennison<jrd at 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 at centos.org >> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >> > > my experiences with KVM > > - overcomittmend possible -> very bad in lots of producation systems How is the *possibility* of overcomittment a bad thing. It gives you additional options. In many situation it *is* a good idea and KVM giving you the option should be a pro not a con. Nobody forces you to overcommit. > - 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...) Define "lots of more memory". Are you sure you are not looking at virtual memory and/or buffers? > - performance Issues, espacially io Citations needed. > - cli tools arent as easy to use than xm / xl If you use libvirt then you can keep using the same tools that you used for xen. The fact that the old tools seem to be easier to use i often a result of familiarity and not necessarily an indicator that the new tools are objectively worse. I don't have any KVM guest in production yet but I've tested with both Linux and Windows 2008 guests and so far I hardly see any difference to my Xen guests. Regards, Dennis