On 11/10/2009 03:35 PM, Grant McWilliams wrote: > > Both Novell and Oracle having been deeply involved in Xen lately, both > are developing and supporting their own products based on Xen. > > -- Pasi > > ___ > > > > I have no problem with a "better" solution than Xen because to be honest > it's a pain sometimes but at this point virtually all enterprise VM > deployments are either based on VMware ESX or Xen (Xenserver, > VirtualIron, Amazon AWS, Oracle, Sun SVM, Redhat and Suse). This tide > will change as KVM becomes more dominant in the VM space but I don't see > that happening for a while. I'm also a bit skeptical as to how well a > fully virtualized system (KVM) will run in comparison to a fully > paravirtualized system (Xen PV). I have a system with 41 VMs on it and > I'll be having 2 weeks of planned downtime in the near future. I'd like > to see how these systems run under KVM. I've been wondering about the definition of PV in the context of KVM/Xen. In the Linux on Linux case for Xen PV practically means that in the HVM case I have to access block devices using /dev/hda while in the PV case I can use the faster /dev/xvda. When using KVM which apparently only supports HVM I can still install a guest using the virtio drivers which seem to do the same as the paravirtualized devices on Xen. So what is the KVM+virtio case if not paravirtualization? Regards, Dennis _______________________________________________ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
