[CentOS] Emulate RHEV On CentOS - A note on Xen v. KVM

Wed Sep 7 14:03:39 UTC 2011
John Hodrien <J.H.Hodrien at leeds.ac.uk>

On Wed, 7 Sep 2011, Always Learning wrote:

>
> On Wed, 2011-09-07 at 09:51 -0400, Digimer wrote:
>
>> Red Hat is a business, and made a simple business decision. Maintaining
>> Xen support would have meant maintaining a very large set of patches.
>> They made the decision that the effort (and money) needed to maintain
>> Xen outside of the mainline kernel was not worth it.
>
> Perhaps a silly question, but why maintain patches ? Why not compile a
> new version and discard all the patches ? Patches are a messy manner to
> maintain programmes.

That's fine if you just want to jump ship to a new version.  But what if the
new version breaks some things, or changes behaviour in a way you don't want,
or removes a feature.  Your choice effectively becomes do I back port things I
want to an old version, or maintain patches that takes current back to the
state I want.

> Which is better on C5 and C6 ?

That's a matter for google, and not necessarily a simple one to answer.  As
was said, Xen was the standard option with C5, and KVM was with C6.

jh