On Aug 19, 2009, at 7:52 AM, Bernhard Gschaider <bgschaid_lists@xxxxxxxxx
> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the replies so far.
>
>>>>>> On Wed, 19 Aug 2009 11:06:08 +0100
>>>>>> "MMG" == Marcelo M Garcia <marcelo.maia.garcia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> wrote:
>
> MMG> Bernhard Gschaider wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> I have the following problem: I have a server (CentOS 5.3
>>> x86_64) on which I want to install a virtual Xen-machine
>>> (CentOS 5.3 x86_64), I ssh from my workstation (Centos 5.3
>>> x86_64 .... do you see the pattern ;) ) to that server and
>>> start the virt-manager. I create a new Guest (Paravirtualiuzed)
>>> and point it to the server with the installation files (CentOS
>>> 5.3, but I already said that). The manager creates the disk
>>> image an then opens the Graphical console for
>>> installation. Sometime around the point where the installation
>>> program wants me to select the keyboard the graphical console
>>> it freezes. The server is completely dead (no console, no disk
>>> activity, no ping, only a reset will "repair" it)
>>>
>>> My question: am I doing something stupid? But I figured
>>> "They're all the same system, this must work"
>>>
>>> I don't want to play around with it too much as the server is
>>> also our file-server and people start complaining.
>>>
>>> So any hint will be greatly appreciated (otherwise I'll have to
>>> setup another machine for the guests)
>>>
>
> MMG> I use the virt-manager, but I always use a kickstart to do
> MMG> the installation and I never had problems.
>
> This (and other replies) lead me to two possible culprits:
> - either the graphical console over X11 is not a good idea (but I
> can't imagine that, it shouldn't shoot the kernel)
> - I always installed as a paravirtualized machine, Could it be that
> the install-kernel on the 5.3-media is not aware of this and somehow
> manages to shot the host (because I noticed that most recipies on
> the
> net, including http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Xen/
> InstallingCentOSDomU
> never talk about paravirtualized (so I assume they use a fully
> virtualized guest)
>
> I will try these later today (when people left the office and no one
> will complain about server downtimes)
>
> Bernhard
>
> BTW: Just one fundamental question: as the upstream OS vendor is
> switching his virtualization to KVM anyway, is it a good idea to
> forget Xen and use KVM (in other words: is it stable enough for
> production)?
Xen still has it's place as it's fully paravirtualized domains are
still way faster then any fully virtualized setups.
Plus it's the only hypervisor I know of that let's you pass-through
just about any PCI device to a domU.
Once VMware gets their pass-through generalized and Intel gets their
next generation hardware virtualization technology mainstreamed, Xen
won't have such an edge in those areas.
I still have yet to see a VMware/KVM framework for cloud computing
where VMs can be seemlessly transferred between hosts or even to an
off-site virtualization provider.
-Ross
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
