On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 02:15:52PM +0100, Hildebrand, Nils, 232 wrote: > Hi, > > just two questions: > 1. Is there anything faster than XEN-paravirtualization? > > 2. Why XEN 5? > XEN 3 is quite stable, too. >
I guess you mean Citrix XenServer 5.5 with "Xen 5" ? It's a completely different, full commercially supported product from Citrix, which has the opensource Xen hypervisor as a part of it. Actually it's based on CentOS. Citrix XenServer 5.x uses Xen 3.x hypervisor. > I have 31 DomUs up and running on a single Box - and have a strong feeling > that even 60 will run flawless. > But: All of them are Para-Virtualized. > Yeah, Linux PV guests perform and work OK. -- Pasi > I have no problem with disk IO-Bottlenecks since my DomUs are not > Database-Servers - so there is mostly static information in the filesystems. > > I see no reason why I should move to KVM. > My only limitation is memory, since RAM is not being virtually mapped yet. > > > Kind regards > > Nils > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: centos-virt-boun...@centos.org > > [mailto:centos-virt-boun...@centos.org] Im Auftrag von > > Christopher G. Stach II > > Gesendet: Freitag, 26. Februar 2010 09:04 > > An: Discussion about the virtualization on CentOS > > Betreff: Re: [CentOS-virt] moving from Xen to KVM > > [...] > > Here are a few tips: > > > > 1. F*** KVM. > > 2. Stick with Xen because there is quite a lot of time until > > 5 is EOL'd and if you haven't noticed, it's actually a mature > > technology. [...] > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-virt mailing list > CentOS-virt@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt _______________________________________________ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt