I tried the Qumranet drivers before I went with Xen. I don't think there is necessarily a problem with the Qumranet drivers, in fact, they could potentially have better inbound speeds than the GPLPV ones (though it seems unlikely as much as people test and James works on them on the xen-users list). The reason the Qumranet drivers don't cut it is because they are only network drivers. This means your data access (and possibly other stuff GPLPV hits) is still fully virtualized. Another reason I went with Xen is the PHY: option. I use a physical data source, as opposed to a file, for my guests. Each one has its own HD, actually, though partitions or RAID arrays would obviously work as well. If I remember correctly, when I tried this (some time ago), KVM had no such option. Dustin -----Original Message----- From: fedora-xen-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:fedora-xen-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Evan Lavelle Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 07:01 To: fedora-xen@xxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Goodbye Xen on RH/Fedora? Veli-Pekka Kestilä wrote: > Also I don't think kvm will be that different or hard to learn if it > becomes to that. It actually has paravirtual network drivers for windows > from Qumranet which you can get without extra fee so I think if you are > having windows clients it could be way to go in future. For xen you need > to pay to Novell for that priviledge. Has anyone tried the Qumranet drivers? My XP clients on Xen are very slow. There are free Windows drivers at http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenWindowsGplPv, but I think they still need some development. -Evan -- Fedora-xen mailing list Fedora-xen@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-xen -- Fedora-xen mailing list Fedora-xen@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-xen
