Prior to CentOS 6.0 I used Xen, switched to KVM with 6.0 because it was
what was supported. I thought I'd take a performance hit but for my
applications (web, mail, ftp, dns, shell servers), I didn't see any noticable
difference other than KVM was a lot easier.
But the fact that people are still working on getting Xen running in
CentOS 6.4 tells me there must be something it does better.
One area I really would like to see working is the qemu emulation of
other architectures so I could run some legacy apps on modern maintainable
hardware.
-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Eskimo North Linux Friendly Internet Access, Shell Accounts, and Hosting.
Knowledgeable human assistance, not telephone trees or script readers.
See our web site: http://www.eskimo.com/ (206) 812-0051 or (800) 246-6874.
On Sun, 26 May 2013, compdoc wrote:
> Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 15:43:44 -0600
> From: compdoc <compdoc@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: 'Discussion about the virtualization on CentOS' <centos-virt@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: Xen on CentOS 6.4
>
> > What are the advantages / disadvantes of Xen / KVM?
>
> Can't say which is better, but KVM works very nicely. I use it to run
> several Linux and Windows virtual machines that act as servers, but which
> are not graphic intensive. (just basic desktop use)
_______________________________________________
CentOS-virt mailing list
CentOS-virt@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
