On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 01:21:46PM -0800, master@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> I upgraded one of my boxes from FC4 (worked great with xen) to FC5 and
> have waited for months for the issues with iptables/NAT/kernel crash to be
> sorted out and corrected. Now all seems well; FC5 and xen seem ready to
> go.
>
> But... FC6 is available. So I'm trying to decide if I should go with
> FC5/xen or upgrade to FC6/xen (since this box isn't being used yet).
>
> Before I commit the box to production, I'd prefer upgrading to FC6/xen so
> I don't need to upgrade it in 4-6 months.
>
> Are there any known, nasty show-stoppers with FC6 and xen? or with FC6 in
> general?
With the latest errata we pushed to FC5, the Xen stacks & kernels on both
FC5 and FC6 are practically identical[1] - they're both running 2.6.18 kernels
with Xen 3.0.3 hypervisor & kernel & userspace bits. So in terms of guest
OS compatability, stability,performance, etc you shouldn't see any difference
between Xen in FC5 & FC6 (assuming both a fully yum update'd). Thus I'd
recommend FC6 since you'll get a longer lifetime before needing to do another
major upgrade.
Regards,
Dan.
[1] In fact FC5 is currently a couple of changesets ahead of FC6, but we'll
have an errata for FC6 to update this soon...
--
|=- Red Hat, Engineering, Emerging Technologies, Boston. +1 978 392 2496 -=|
|=- Perl modules: http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ -=|
|=- Projects: http://freshmeat.net/~danielpb/ -=|
|=- GnuPG: 7D3B9505 F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 -=|
--
Fedora-xen mailing list
Fedora-xen@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-xen
