Yes I have the similar experience like Mike. I am running several FreeSWITCH on xen no problem so far.
FreeSWITCH is amazing. Here is another success stories through the FreeSWITCH mailing list. FreeSWITCH on AWS' EC2 with 100 extensions. http://lists.freeswitch.org/pipermail/freeswitch-users/2010-March/026768.html Thanks Lloyd On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Mike Ashton <[email protected]>wrote: > I've not installed asterisk on xen with much success, but that was over a > year and a half ago, so things may have improved. > > But we do have in production with absolutely no issues freeswitch running > on xen for over 8 months now. We will be decommissioning all of our asterisk > servers as we migrate to a xen based virtualized infrastructure which is > allowing us to reduce from a full rack to a half rack at 151 front. > > Mike > > > On 03/04/2010 10:51 AM, John Lange wrote: > > This discussion really boils down to the difference between > full-virtualization and para-virtualization. > > Do a google search for "full virtualization vs. paravirtualization". > > One of the things you will learn is that VMWare is full virtualization > and Xen is para-virtualization. > > Para virtualization exposes parts of the underlying hardware allowing > the guest OS direct access to some things, chief among them hardware > clocks and timing which is absolutely critical to Asterisk. > > Asterisk running on a fully virtualized guest OS is unlikely to run > properly because the clock bounces all over the place. Even just keeping > the proper date and time is problematic on these systems which is why > you are supposed to install "VMWare tools" which helps mitigate these > issues. > > On the other hand, my understanding is that Asterisk on Xen runs great. > I believe there is even a commercial product for hosted PBXes that is > based on this though the name escapes me at the moment. > > And there Xen kernel modules for Digium cards meaning you install the > Digium cards in the Xen box and then all the virtual machines can access > them just as if they were installed on the local system. > > A couple more things to keep in mind: > > - there is a massive difference between virtualization installed on top > of an existing OS (such as VirtualBox, Microsoft Virtualization and all > the "free" VMWare products), and "bare metal" virtualization like ESX > and Xen. Bare metal is the only way to go for serious virtualization. > > - There are now specially tuned installs of some OSes designed for > virtualization. For example, SUSE has an option for "this is a > virtualized system" which installs all the specially tuned kernel > options which makes a major performance difference. > > - And, everything I've said above, while still true, is a bit outdated. > VMWare has recently gotten into the para virtualization game and there > has been _tons_ of work done on the linux kernel in the last couple > years to improve the performance of full and para virtulized systems. > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >
