On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Eric Shubert <ejs@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The hardware available to us is quite old, so pushing performance is absolutely the key issue. Stability/reliability and ease of maintenance are of course also factors. But since I've not have any bad experiences with OpenVZ in those respects, and I expect Xen to be at least as good, it pretty much comes down to performance.
Unfortunately it doesn't. We're doing a "parallell shift" from a host with 2xOpteron 250 (2.4GHz) to another host with 8xOpteron 880 (also 2.4GHz but dual-core), so apart from the increase in number of cores from 2 to 16 and amount of RAM from 6 to 32GB there's no real difference to be found. But since we're transitioning anyway, we're giving alternative technology a consideration.
But okay, are you saying that Xen will at best be as good as OpenVZ using this hardware, and there's really not much point in me spending time learning Xen and running performance tests? That would save me quite a few workdays :)
Thanks, I already looked at KVM, but it seems to require the virtualization bit, which means it is not an option for us.
Thanks for your input, Eric, it is much appreciated :)
Cheers,
Einar
Is your goal absolute best performance (why?), or simply adequate
performance?
The hardware available to us is quite old, so pushing performance is absolutely the key issue. Stability/reliability and ease of maintenance are of course also factors. But since I've not have any bad experiences with OpenVZ in those respects, and I expect Xen to be at least as good, it pretty much comes down to performance.
I wouldn't expect to see Xen outperform OpenVZ. However, if your CPU has
has virtualization extensions, I would expect performance to be pretty
close between the two.
Unfortunately it doesn't. We're doing a "parallell shift" from a host with 2xOpteron 250 (2.4GHz) to another host with 8xOpteron 880 (also 2.4GHz but dual-core), so apart from the increase in number of cores from 2 to 16 and amount of RAM from 6 to 32GB there's no real difference to be found. But since we're transitioning anyway, we're giving alternative technology a consideration.
But okay, are you saying that Xen will at best be as good as OpenVZ using this hardware, and there's really not much point in me spending time learning Xen and running performance tests? That would save me quite a few workdays :)
That being said, if you're considering Xen, I'd give strong
consideration to KVM as well.
Thanks, I already looked at KVM, but it seems to require the virtualization bit, which means it is not an option for us.
Thanks for your input, Eric, it is much appreciated :)
Cheers,
Einar
_______________________________________________ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
