Wow, maybe the F8 documentation doesn't cover that, or maybe I'm remembering wrong, but good to know for future testing. Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: Avi Kivity [mailto:avi@xxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 13:43 To: Dustin.Henning@xxxxxxxxxxx Cc: 'Evan Lavelle'; fedora-xen@xxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Goodbye Xen on RH/Fedora? Dustin Henning wrote: > 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. Storage drivers are in the works, hopefully out soon. > 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 kvm has had this from day 1; 'qemu /dev/volgroup/logvol' will start a guest from the specified logical volume. For good performance I recommend 'qemu -drive file=/dev/volgroup/logvol,cache=off'. Of course, libvirt will handle all that for you. -- I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this signature is too narrow to contain. -- Fedora-xen mailing list Fedora-xen@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-xen
