Thanks scott , the information given by you is very very helpful.
On 10/20/10, Scott Dowdle <[email protected]> wrote: > Greetings, > > ----- Original Message ----- >> I have need to implement operating system level virtualization >> to isolate a application on RHEL 5.5. Which one in following you would >> suggest me for implementation >> Linux-VServer, lxc, OpenVZ or anyone else. > > I'm a big OpenVZ person myself and have been using it for close to 5 years > now... and my primary distro of choice for the host node is either RHEL or > CentOS... mainly because the two OpenVZ stable branches are based on RHEL > kernels. > > LXC definitely shows potential but you'll have to wait for RHEL 6 to use > it... or use some other distro with a newer kernel that has LXC support and > tools packaged up. Fedora and Ubuntu seem to be leading the way with LXC > even though they aren't trying very hard. At least they package the tools. > LXC is mainly painful because it lacks a comprehensive admin tool like > OpenVZ's vzctl. I haven't used LXC much so I am NOT speaking from > experience but from what little information I've gathered reading the LXC > user mailing list. I think LXC is definitely the future of containers (aka > OS Virtualization) because: 1) It is in the mainline kernel, and 2) Neither > OpenVZ nor Linux-VServer have any plans of ever going to the mainline. Just > how long it will take LXC to mature or a vzctl type app to appear for it, I > don't know. LXC may languish for yet another few years unless someone in > the distro community starts showing it some love. > > Linux-VServer is good too but I'm less familiar with it. > > One thing to point out though is that OpenVZ (and Linux-VServer so far as I > know) does not work with SELinux. It might in fact be compatible with > SELinux BUT the install / configuration instructions for OpenVZ say to > disable it. I'm not sure if that is mainly because they don't want to have > to support that configuration... or if life would be good if there was an > OpenVZ specific SELinux policy created. > > In any event, it really depends on what it is you are wanting to do with the > OS Virt isolation. It may be that simply chroot'ing and using SELinux would > work well enough... but if you have more advanced needs (resource limits, > checkpointing, isolated network stack, etc) OpenVZ would be a better fit. > Some might say that it would be better to use hardware virtualization like > Xen paravirt because it has some advantages over OS Virt... like being able > to run different kernels... and with fully virtualized, different OSes. > Again, it all depends on what you are trying to do. OS Virtualization > definitely has benefits in density and scalability... and to a lesser degree > performance... but it isn't right for everything... which is why having all > of these different solutions is good... as they all have their own strengths > and weaknesses. > > If you decide you want to check out OpenVZ, I recommend you read the OpenVZ > Users Guide (a bit dated but still good - > http://download.openvz.org/doc/OpenVZ-Users-Guide.pdf), the Quick Install > Guide (http://wiki.openvz.org/Quick_installation), and / or the CentOS Howto > (http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/Virtualization/OpenVZ). I wrote the later. > And finally, one last OpenVZ related resource, the #openvz IRC channel on > Freenode. I'm there most of the time during MST work hours. > > TYL, > -- > Scott Dowdle > 704 Church Street > Belgrade, MT 59714 > (406)388-0827 [home] > (406)994-3931 [work] > > _______________________________________________ > rhelv5-list mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list > -- http://linuxinterviews.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ rhelv5-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list
