Re: [CentOS-virt] CentOS-5.4, KVM, QEMU, Virt-Manager and kvm-qemu-img
On Tue, 2009-11-10 at 15:07 -0500, James B. Byrne wrote: > On Tue, November 10, 2009 11:55, Kenni Lund wrote: > > > > > Hmm, try to have a look at this: > > http://www.linux-kvm.com/content/using-bridged-networking-virt-manager > > > > Got it. Thanks. I will give this a read tonight while I am relaxing > with the "Red Hat Virtualization" guide. James, Sometimes it helps to read an explanation from two sources. At libvirt.org, the bridged networking (shared physical device) writeup gives similar info to the above link and can be found here: http://wiki.libvirt.org/page/Networking#Creating_network_initscripts Once you define the bridge in /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/, modify the host ifcfg-eth0 to include the BRIDGE= statement (and remove the normal BOOTPROTO= statement) and either disable netfilter on the bridge or add the physdev --physdev-is-bridged iptables rule, then you are basically done. Restart the network/iptables/libvirtd and you are good to go. Takes maybe 5 min. to set up and does not require any knowledge of brctl. Steve ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > Quotes: > > "So, KVM requires 66.93/52.85 = 26.6% more CPU to do the same amount of work." > "If we normalize to CPU utilization, Xen is doing 20% more throughput." > "KVM running Windows VMs uses 46% more CPU than the Other-Hypervisor" > "A different hypervisor was compared; KVM used about 60% more CPU cycles to > complete the same amount of work." > Funny they saying "Other-Hypervisor" or "A different hypervisor". Saying "KVM uses about 60% more CPU cycles to complete the same amount of work than Xen" would probably make an Slashdot headline. ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:36:39PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 01:52:36PM -0500, Scott McClanahan wrote: > > > > > Yeah.. Xen paravirtualized mmu is fast, and in some (many) cases beats > > > CPU hardware virtualized mmu. > > > > > > KVM has 'pvmmu' aswell, but it's not as good, so KVM is faster with CPU > > > hardware virtualization. But that's a problem of KVM only, they haven't > > > managed to optimize the pvmmu. And they're going to drop it altogether. > > > > > > KVM people tend to say 'paravirtualized mmu is slow', but they just mean > > > KVM implementation of it sucks :) > > > > > > -- Pasi > > > > I haven't tested or seen any benchmarks but I wonder how much the > > addition of a page table for virtualized guests will help. Not to > > mention newer features like a virtualized task priority register and > > ASID could continue to require less paravirt code in the guest. I get > > my two new 5500 series servers in a few weeks so I'm pretty excited to > > see some of the second gen hardware virtualization assist features in > > action. > > > > I don't know. Of course hardware will add features and get more > optimized in the future. > > Some benchmarks from IBM guys, Xen vs. KVM: > http://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm/msg13910.html > http://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm/msg14068.html > http://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm/msg21913.html > And forgot this one: http://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm/msg16579.html -- Pasi > Quotes: > > "So, KVM requires 66.93/52.85 = 26.6% more CPU to do the same amount of work." > "If we normalize to CPU utilization, Xen is doing 20% more throughput." > "KVM running Windows VMs uses 46% more CPU than the Other-Hypervisor" > "A different hypervisor was compared; KVM used about 60% more CPU cycles to > complete the same amount of work." > > I bet KVM will catch up at some point.. at the moment it seems to not > perform as good as Xen. Then again it's a much younger product. > ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 01:52:36PM -0500, Scott McClanahan wrote: > > > Yeah.. Xen paravirtualized mmu is fast, and in some (many) cases beats > > CPU hardware virtualized mmu. > > > > KVM has 'pvmmu' aswell, but it's not as good, so KVM is faster with CPU > > hardware virtualization. But that's a problem of KVM only, they haven't > > managed to optimize the pvmmu. And they're going to drop it altogether. > > > > KVM people tend to say 'paravirtualized mmu is slow', but they just mean > > KVM implementation of it sucks :) > > > > -- Pasi > > I haven't tested or seen any benchmarks but I wonder how much the > addition of a page table for virtualized guests will help. Not to > mention newer features like a virtualized task priority register and > ASID could continue to require less paravirt code in the guest. I get > my two new 5500 series servers in a few weeks so I'm pretty excited to > see some of the second gen hardware virtualization assist features in > action. > I don't know. Of course hardware will add features and get more optimized in the future. Some benchmarks from IBM guys, Xen vs. KVM: http://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm/msg13910.html http://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm/msg14068.html http://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm/msg21913.html Quotes: "So, KVM requires 66.93/52.85 = 26.6% more CPU to do the same amount of work." "If we normalize to CPU utilization, Xen is doing 20% more throughput." "KVM running Windows VMs uses 46% more CPU than the Other-Hypervisor" "A different hypervisor was compared; KVM used about 60% more CPU cycles to complete the same amount of work." I bet KVM will catch up at some point.. at the moment it seems to not perform as good as Xen. Then again it's a much younger product. -- Pasi ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
[CentOS-virt] Migration checklist
Is there a current list of the required "matchups" to migrating guests from one Xen host to another? I doesn't appear to me that paravirtualized machines have much in the way of obstacles. Hardware doesn't seem to play into it. What about Xen kernel matchups, say from a Xen 3.4 to a Xen 3.1? How fussy is the HVM migration? Would moving an HVM from an AMD64 Athlon X4 AMD chipset to an Opteron X4 nVidia chipset have issues? What about a "hybrid" HVM-PV, like Windows 2008 with GPLPV drivers installed and where you have installed to a chipset as an HVM and then swapped to a PV? I'm going to begin trying, but some time-saving tips, or a checklist, would be welcomed. ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
Fedora 12 doesnt come with Xen and from what I heard RHEL 6 will be based on F12. In the F12 release notes it states that they might port Xen in 2.6.33. "The kernel package in Fedora 12 supports booting as a guest domU, but will not function as a dom0 until such support is provided upstream. Work is ongoing and hopes are high that support will be included in kernel 2.6.33 and Fedora 13." I will start testing kvm+virtio+ovirt for my 5-6 virtual machines to migrate from xen. It seems that its the way to go for future deployments. Xen works fine for me now so I am not in a rush. I started with xen, moved to xenserver, moved back to xen and I will start testing kvm soon. -Adam On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 1:52 PM, Scott McClanahan wrote: > > > Yeah.. Xen paravirtualized mmu is fast, and in some (many) cases beats > > CPU hardware virtualized mmu. > > > > KVM has 'pvmmu' aswell, but it's not as good, so KVM is faster with CPU > > hardware virtualization. But that's a problem of KVM only, they haven't > > managed to optimize the pvmmu. And they're going to drop it altogether. > > > > KVM people tend to say 'paravirtualized mmu is slow', but they just mean > > KVM implementation of it sucks :) > > > > -- Pasi > > I haven't tested or seen any benchmarks but I wonder how much the > addition of a page table for virtualized guests will help. Not to > mention newer features like a virtualized task priority register and > ASID could continue to require less paravirt code in the guest. I get > my two new 5500 series servers in a few weeks so I'm pretty excited to > see some of the second gen hardware virtualization assist features in > action. > > ___ > 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
Re: [CentOS-virt] CentOS-5.4, KVM, QEMU, Virt-Manager and kvm-qemu-img
On Tue, November 10, 2009 11:55, Kenni Lund wrote: > > Hmm, try to have a look at this: > http://www.linux-kvm.com/content/using-bridged-networking-virt-manager > Got it. Thanks. I will give this a read tonight while I am relaxing with the "Red Hat Virtualization" guide. Regards, -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3 ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
> Yeah.. Xen paravirtualized mmu is fast, and in some (many) cases beats > CPU hardware virtualized mmu. > > KVM has 'pvmmu' aswell, but it's not as good, so KVM is faster with CPU > hardware virtualization. But that's a problem of KVM only, they haven't > managed to optimize the pvmmu. And they're going to drop it altogether. > > KVM people tend to say 'paravirtualized mmu is slow', but they just mean > KVM implementation of it sucks :) > > -- Pasi I haven't tested or seen any benchmarks but I wonder how much the addition of a page table for virtualized guests will help. Not to mention newer features like a virtualized task priority register and ASID could continue to require less paravirt code in the guest. I get my two new 5500 series servers in a few weeks so I'm pretty excited to see some of the second gen hardware virtualization assist features in action. ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] Xen pci passthru problems with kernel -164.6.1
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 01:57:42PM -0200, Miguel Di Ciurcio Filho wrote: > I previously reported this on the centos mailing list: > > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2009-November/085672.html > > And I've found out that Red Hat has backported the VT-d support from Xen > 3.3 to RHEL 5.4. > > http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2009-November/085677.html > > It seams to me that the "classic" Xen pci-passthru (up to Xen 3.2) works > only on some minor cases as described here (when using the new kernel > and hypervisor): > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=514458#c4 > > The recommendation seams to be (although not stated at any > documentation) to use the VT-d support for various reasons (better > security for the guests when accessing the hardware I guess). > > My concern is that the hardware I use does not support VT-d (it is a > Intel 5000P chipset, ~2 years old) so I believe I'm kind of screwed. Or > keep using the kernel and Xen packages from 5.3 (not a good option either). > Yeah.. VT-d support is only on most recent chipsets, and many BIOSes still have broken implementations of it :( > Am I the only one bitten by this? > Yeah I guess.. so far.. -- Pasi ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 07:49:01AM -0800, Grant McWilliams wrote: > Which I guess makes describing a guest as "fully virtualized" or > "paravirtualized" rather pointless given that there now is just a degree > of > how paravirtualized a guest is depending on the drivers you use. > > Regards, > Â Dennis > >I disagree completely. KVM or Xen HVM are fully virtualized except for two >drivers. This is not >the same thing as paravirtualized. People seem to think the only thing a >computer does is access the >disk and network device. With a PV everything is running native and the >only overhead is from the Hypervisor. > >In a most cases using the VT bits in the CPU makes the virtualization >slower in all aspects. This may not be the case >in the future. The developers of VirtualBox have documented this. > Yeah.. Xen paravirtualized mmu is fast, and in some (many) cases beats CPU hardware virtualized mmu. KVM has 'pvmmu' aswell, but it's not as good, so KVM is faster with CPU hardware virtualization. But that's a problem of KVM only, they haven't managed to optimize the pvmmu. And they're going to drop it altogether. KVM people tend to say 'paravirtualized mmu is slow', but they just mean KVM implementation of it sucks :) -- Pasi ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] CentOS-5.4, KVM, QEMU, Virt-Manager and kvm-qemu-img
>> Ok, once you get a grasp of it, I'm sure you'll find it pretty >> simple :) Install kvm + virt-manager + libvirt, setup a bridge, use >> virt-manager to create a new virtual machine which uses the bridge. >> Now you're done, nothing more needed. > > The problem being is that I have already done all that and it simply > does not work as expected. So I infer that there a few important > details that everyone is leaving out of their descriptions, possibly > because they assume them as preconditions. Hmm, try to have a look at this: http://www.linux-kvm.com/content/using-bridged-networking-virt-manager Like shown in the screenshot in section 4, you should select "Shared physical device" and then select your bridge in the drop-down menu. This should NOT give you usermode network (a 192.168.122.x address), this should instead connect the virtual machine to your network, meaning you can request a DHCP address if you have a DHCP server or assign a static IP inside the virtual machine. Best Regards Kenni Lund ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] CentOS-5.4, KVM, QEMU, Virt-Manager and kvm-qemu-img
On Tue, November 10, 2009 10:12, Kenni Lund wrote: > > Ok, once you get a grasp of it, I'm sure you'll find it pretty > simple :) Install kvm + virt-manager + libvirt, setup a bridge, use > virt-manager to create a new virtual machine which uses the bridge. > Now you're done, nothing more needed. The problem being is that I have already done all that and it simply does not work as expected. So I infer that there a few important details that everyone is leaving out of their descriptions, possibly because they assume them as preconditions. Regards, -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3 ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] CentOS-5.4, KVM, QEMU, Virt-Manager and kvm-qemu-img
James B. Byrne wrote on Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:06:40 -0500 (EST): > It seems that I get some variant of 192.168.122.x where I need an you are getting this from dnsmasq. libvirt sets the dnsmasq service to on because it relies on it for DHCP. > actual routable address in the 216.185.71.0/24 space. Static? Then simply set it. DHCP? Then shut off dnsmasq. At least with Xen that's all what is needed. Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Dennis J. wrote: > On 11/10/2009 04:02 PM, Ray Van Dolson wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 06:57:08AM -0800, Grant McWilliams wrote: > >> All of it except for that! Your VM isn't just a process accessing a > >> disk. With KVM they've attacked the most commond devices - network and > >> disk and offered paravirtualized devices. This doesn't concern me as the > >> speed has proven to be good although in mysqlbench Xen still leads by > >> quite a bit. I'm concerned about everything else. With 41 interactive > >> VMs I worry about how fast the hypervisor can switch focus, the cpu > >> utilization of each etc.. > > > > What are the hardware specs you're running your 41 VM's off of just out > > of curiosity? > > I'd be interested in that info too especially the storage setup. I imagine > local storage isn't suitable for this many VMs on a single host. > > Regards, >Dennis > > Eight core Xeon, 32 GB of ram and local storage for now. The storage is the main bottleneck but as soon as my PO goes through I'll have a second machine providing storage from the RAID via iSCSI. I have other ideas but I'll be putting them in a different post. Students access their VM via NX. As you can imagine the requirements for this setup is not the same as for 40 web servers... I'm still in the process of finding ways of tweaking it to get whatever speed I can. Grant McWilliams ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
[CentOS-virt] Xen pci passthru problems with kernel -164.6.1
I previously reported this on the centos mailing list: http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2009-November/085672.html And I've found out that Red Hat has backported the VT-d support from Xen 3.3 to RHEL 5.4. http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2009-November/085677.html It seams to me that the "classic" Xen pci-passthru (up to Xen 3.2) works only on some minor cases as described here (when using the new kernel and hypervisor): https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=514458#c4 The recommendation seams to be (although not stated at any documentation) to use the VT-d support for various reasons (better security for the guests when accessing the hardware I guess). My concern is that the hardware I use does not support VT-d (it is a Intel 5000P chipset, ~2 years old) so I believe I'm kind of screwed. Or keep using the kernel and Xen packages from 5.3 (not a good option either). Am I the only one bitten by this? ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
> > > > Which I guess makes describing a guest as "fully virtualized" or > "paravirtualized" rather pointless given that there now is just a degree of > how paravirtualized a guest is depending on the drivers you use. > > Regards, >Dennis > > I disagree completely. KVM or Xen HVM are fully virtualized except for two drivers. This is not the same thing as paravirtualized. People seem to think the only thing a computer does is access the disk and network device. With a PV everything is running native and the only overhead is from the Hypervisor. In a most cases using the VT bits in the CPU makes the virtualization slower in all aspects. This may not be the case in the future. The developers of VirtualBox have documented this. Grant McWilliams Some people, when confronted with a problem, think "I know, I'll use Windows." Now they have two problems. ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On 11/10/2009 04:13 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 05:12:50PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 03:49:59PM +0100, Dennis J. wrote: >>> On 11/10/2009 03:35 PM, Grant McWilliams wrote: Both Novell and Oracle having been deeply involved in Xen lately, both are developing and supporting their own products based on Xen. -- Pasi ___ I have no problem with a "better" solution than Xen because to be honest it's a pain sometimes but at this point virtually all enterprise VM deployments are either based on VMware ESX or Xen (Xenserver, VirtualIron, Amazon AWS, Oracle, Sun SVM, Redhat and Suse). This tide will change as KVM becomes more dominant in the VM space but I don't see that happening for a while. I'm also a bit skeptical as to how well a fully virtualized system (KVM) will run in comparison to a fully paravirtualized system (Xen PV). I have a system with 41 VMs on it and I'll be having 2 weeks of planned downtime in the near future. I'd like to see how these systems run under KVM. >>> >>> I've been wondering about the definition of PV in the context of KVM/Xen. >>> In the Linux on Linux case for Xen PV practically means that in the HVM >>> case I have to access block devices using /dev/hda while in the PV case I >>> can use the faster /dev/xvda. When using KVM which apparently only supports >>> HVM I can still install a guest using the virtio drivers which seem to do >>> the same as the paravirtualized devices on Xen. >>> >>> So what is the KVM+virtio case if not paravirtualization? >>> >> >> KVM+virtio means you're using paravirtualized disk/net drivers on a >> fully virtualized guest.. where Qemu emulates full PC hardware with BIOS >> and all. So only the disk/net virtio drivers bypass Qemu emulation. >> (Those are the most important and most used devices.) >> >> Xen paravirtualized guests run natively on Xen, there's no need for >> emulation since the guest kernels are aware that they're being >> virtualized.. There's no Qemu emulating PC hardware with BIOS for PV guests. >> > > Oh, and Xen also has PV-on-HVM drivers for HVM fully virtualized guests > to bypass Qemu :) Which I guess makes describing a guest as "fully virtualized" or "paravirtualized" rather pointless given that there now is just a degree of how paravirtualized a guest is depending on the drivers you use. Regards, Dennis ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 05:12:50PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 03:49:59PM +0100, Dennis J. wrote: > > On 11/10/2009 03:35 PM, Grant McWilliams wrote: > > > > > > Both Novell and Oracle having been deeply involved in Xen lately, both > > > are developing and supporting their own products based on Xen. > > > > > > -- Pasi > > > > > > ___ > > > > > > > > > > > > I have no problem with a "better" solution than Xen because to be honest > > > it's a pain sometimes but at this point virtually all enterprise VM > > > deployments are either based on VMware ESX or Xen (Xenserver, > > > VirtualIron, Amazon AWS, Oracle, Sun SVM, Redhat and Suse). This tide > > > will change as KVM becomes more dominant in the VM space but I don't see > > > that happening for a while. I'm also a bit skeptical as to how well a > > > fully virtualized system (KVM) will run in comparison to a fully > > > paravirtualized system (Xen PV). I have a system with 41 VMs on it and > > > I'll be having 2 weeks of planned downtime in the near future. I'd like > > > to see how these systems run under KVM. > > > > I've been wondering about the definition of PV in the context of KVM/Xen. > > In the Linux on Linux case for Xen PV practically means that in the HVM > > case I have to access block devices using /dev/hda while in the PV case I > > can use the faster /dev/xvda. When using KVM which apparently only supports > > HVM I can still install a guest using the virtio drivers which seem to do > > the same as the paravirtualized devices on Xen. > > > > So what is the KVM+virtio case if not paravirtualization? > > > > KVM+virtio means you're using paravirtualized disk/net drivers on a > fully virtualized guest.. where Qemu emulates full PC hardware with BIOS > and all. So only the disk/net virtio drivers bypass Qemu emulation. > (Those are the most important and most used devices.) > > Xen paravirtualized guests run natively on Xen, there's no need for > emulation since the guest kernels are aware that they're being > virtualized.. There's no Qemu emulating PC hardware with BIOS for PV guests. > Oh, and Xen also has PV-on-HVM drivers for HVM fully virtualized guests to bypass Qemu :) -- Pasi ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On 11/10/2009 04:02 PM, Ray Van Dolson wrote: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 06:57:08AM -0800, Grant McWilliams wrote: >> All of it except for that! Your VM isn't just a process accessing a >> disk. With KVM they've attacked the most commond devices - network and >> disk and offered paravirtualized devices. This doesn't concern me as the >> speed has proven to be good although in mysqlbench Xen still leads by >> quite a bit. I'm concerned about everything else. With 41 interactive >> VMs I worry about how fast the hypervisor can switch focus, the cpu >> utilization of each etc.. > > What are the hardware specs you're running your 41 VM's off of just out > of curiosity? I'd be interested in that info too especially the storage setup. I imagine local storage isn't suitable for this many VMs on a single host. Regards, Dennis ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 03:49:59PM +0100, Dennis J. wrote: > On 11/10/2009 03:35 PM, Grant McWilliams wrote: > > > > Both Novell and Oracle having been deeply involved in Xen lately, both > > are developing and supporting their own products based on Xen. > > > > -- Pasi > > > > ___ > > > > > > > > I have no problem with a "better" solution than Xen because to be honest > > it's a pain sometimes but at this point virtually all enterprise VM > > deployments are either based on VMware ESX or Xen (Xenserver, > > VirtualIron, Amazon AWS, Oracle, Sun SVM, Redhat and Suse). This tide > > will change as KVM becomes more dominant in the VM space but I don't see > > that happening for a while. I'm also a bit skeptical as to how well a > > fully virtualized system (KVM) will run in comparison to a fully > > paravirtualized system (Xen PV). I have a system with 41 VMs on it and > > I'll be having 2 weeks of planned downtime in the near future. I'd like > > to see how these systems run under KVM. > > I've been wondering about the definition of PV in the context of KVM/Xen. > In the Linux on Linux case for Xen PV practically means that in the HVM > case I have to access block devices using /dev/hda while in the PV case I > can use the faster /dev/xvda. When using KVM which apparently only supports > HVM I can still install a guest using the virtio drivers which seem to do > the same as the paravirtualized devices on Xen. > > So what is the KVM+virtio case if not paravirtualization? > KVM+virtio means you're using paravirtualized disk/net drivers on a fully virtualized guest.. where Qemu emulates full PC hardware with BIOS and all. So only the disk/net virtio drivers bypass Qemu emulation. (Those are the most important and most used devices.) Xen paravirtualized guests run natively on Xen, there's no need for emulation since the guest kernels are aware that they're being virtualized.. There's no Qemu emulating PC hardware with BIOS for PV guests. -- Pasi ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] CentOS-5.4, KVM, QEMU, Virt-Manager and kvm-qemu-img
2009/11/10 James B. Byrne : > > On Tue, November 10, 2009 09:16, Kenni Lund wrote: > >> >> You need to configure your virtual machine to use a shared device, >> eg. your bridge. If your client gets a 192.168.122.x address, you've >> setup your virtual machine to use usermode networking. >> > > I have obtained the RedHat Virtualization Guide dated September 2009 > and will go through that today and tonight. I know that eventually > I will get this to work, but at the moment things appear very > frustrating. Ok, once you get a grasp of it, I'm sure you'll find it pretty simple :) Install kvm + virt-manager + libvirt, setup a bridge, use virt-manager to create a new virtual machine which uses the bridge. Now you're done, nothing more needed. Best Regards Kenni ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On 11/10/2009 03:57 PM, Grant McWilliams wrote: > > > I've been wondering about the definition of PV in the context of > KVM/Xen. > In the Linux on Linux case for Xen PV practically means that in the HVM > case I have to access block devices using /dev/hda while in the PV > case I > can use the faster /dev/xvda. When using KVM which apparently only > supports > HVM I can still install a guest using the virtio drivers which seem > to do > the same as the paravirtualized devices on Xen. > > So what is the KVM+virtio case if not paravirtualization? > > Regards, >Dennis > __ > > > All of it except for that! Your VM isn't just a process accessing a > disk. With KVM they've attacked the most commond devices - network and > disk and offered paravirtualized devices. This doesn't concern me as the > speed has proven to be good although in mysqlbench Xen still leads by > quite a bit. I'm concerned about everything else. With 41 interactive > VMs I worry about how fast the hypervisor can switch focus, the cpu > utilization of each etc.. I get that but if the line is becoming this blurry (with KVM apparently beeing "somewhat" paravirtualized) does it make sense anymore to distinguish between HVM/PV? Regards, Dennis ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 06:57:08AM -0800, Grant McWilliams wrote: > All of it except for that! Your VM isn't just a process accessing a > disk. With KVM they've attacked the most commond devices - network and > disk and offered paravirtualized devices. This doesn't concern me as the > speed has proven to be good although in mysqlbench Xen still leads by > quite a bit. I'm concerned about everything else. With 41 interactive > VMs I worry about how fast the hypervisor can switch focus, the cpu > utilization of each etc.. What are the hardware specs you're running your 41 VM's off of just out of curiosity? Ray ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
> > > > I've been wondering about the definition of PV in the context of KVM/Xen. > In the Linux on Linux case for Xen PV practically means that in the HVM > case I have to access block devices using /dev/hda while in the PV case I > can use the faster /dev/xvda. When using KVM which apparently only supports > HVM I can still install a guest using the virtio drivers which seem to do > the same as the paravirtualized devices on Xen. > > So what is the KVM+virtio case if not paravirtualization? > > Regards, >Dennis > __ > All of it except for that! Your VM isn't just a process accessing a disk. With KVM they've attacked the most commond devices - network and disk and offered paravirtualized devices. This doesn't concern me as the speed has proven to be good although in mysqlbench Xen still leads by quite a bit. I'm concerned about everything else. With 41 interactive VMs I worry about how fast the hypervisor can switch focus, the cpu utilization of each etc.. Grant McWilliams Some people, when confronted with a problem, think "I know, I'll use Windows." Now they have two problems. ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] CentOS-5.4, KVM, QEMU, Virt-Manager and kvm-qemu-img
On Tue, November 10, 2009 09:16, Kenni Lund wrote: > > You need to configure your virtual machine to use a shared device, > eg. your bridge. If your client gets a 192.168.122.x address, you've > setup your virtual machine to use usermode networking. > I have obtained the RedHat Virtualization Guide dated September 2009 and will go through that today and tonight. I know that eventually I will get this to work, but at the moment things appear very frustrating. Regards, -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3 ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On 11/10/2009 03:35 PM, Grant McWilliams wrote: > > Both Novell and Oracle having been deeply involved in Xen lately, both > are developing and supporting their own products based on Xen. > > -- Pasi > > ___ > > > > I have no problem with a "better" solution than Xen because to be honest > it's a pain sometimes but at this point virtually all enterprise VM > deployments are either based on VMware ESX or Xen (Xenserver, > VirtualIron, Amazon AWS, Oracle, Sun SVM, Redhat and Suse). This tide > will change as KVM becomes more dominant in the VM space but I don't see > that happening for a while. I'm also a bit skeptical as to how well a > fully virtualized system (KVM) will run in comparison to a fully > paravirtualized system (Xen PV). I have a system with 41 VMs on it and > I'll be having 2 weeks of planned downtime in the near future. I'd like > to see how these systems run under KVM. I've been wondering about the definition of PV in the context of KVM/Xen. In the Linux on Linux case for Xen PV practically means that in the HVM case I have to access block devices using /dev/hda while in the PV case I can use the faster /dev/xvda. When using KVM which apparently only supports HVM I can still install a guest using the virtio drivers which seem to do the same as the paravirtualized devices on Xen. So what is the KVM+virtio case if not paravirtualization? Regards, Dennis ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 04:42:09PM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 09:36:17AM -0500, Ben M. wrote: > > I concur with Pasi. Please substantiate claims of fact with links. > > Otherwise it is relegated to my phantom fact & rumor mongering folders, > > which is where this conversation is heading. Pasi asked several times > > for substantiation and I see he requests have been completely ignored or > > sidestepped. > > > > If there is some factual basis to below please supply: > > > > > > A) "Still it isn't official, but Citrix XenServer will disappears soon > > ... It will be integrated under Microsoft Hyper-V " > > > > [Which seems to be awkward since the other way around would be better > > (Hyper-V off of XenServer).] > > > > and the basis of: > > > > B) "Citrix virtualization bussiness will be focused only on Management > > and Desktop virtualization using Hper-V as a first platform and second > > VMware." > > > > Repeating (unsubstantiated statements over and over does not make them > > more true or helpful for the list members to stay informed, it is only a > > social engineering tool not an answer. Do you have some links to these > > statements? > > > > Indeed. > > In that interview (that I linked) Simon clearly says they're continuing > in the server virtualization market, and growing fast. Citrix has > doubled XenServer/XenCenter customers from Q1. > > Also he says the next version of XenServer is coming in the beginning of 2010. > And we're getting a bit offtopic about Xen and RHEL6.. -- Pasi > > > > > > > Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 01:36:32PM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > > >> Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > >>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 01:20:11PM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > > Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:27:57AM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > > >> Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > >> > > Still it isn't official, but Citrix XenServer will disappears soon > > ... It will be > > integrated under Microsoft Hyper-V > > > > >>> Uhm.. I don't believe this. Where did you read that? > > >>> > > >>> Citrix XenServer was opensourced last week, or the hypervisor+tools > > >>> part, the xencenter management interface remains closed source (but > > >>> it > > >>> can also manage hyper-v). > > >>> > > IMHO, it isn't a good option to maintain domO virt servers based > > on CentOS or RHEL > > now ... It is the time to migrate to another solutions ... > > > > >>> RHEL5, with Xen, will be fully supported by Redhat until 2014. They > > >>> have > > >>> clearly stated that many times. > > >>> > > >>> -- Pasi > > >> Ok, I think I haven't explained well, sorry. Citrix Xenserver's > > >> hypervisor and tools > > >> was donated by Citrix last week, correct. But Citrix didn't release > > >> more versions of > > >> the product because it does not intend to develop it and apply new > > >> features. Citrix > > >> virtualization bussiness will be focused only on Management and > > >> Desktop > > >> virtualization using Hper-V as a first platform and second VMware. > > >> > > > Where did you read this? You write it like it's a fact - I haven't > > > seen > > > that anywhere.. ?? > > This will be announced over next weeks ... > > > > >>> Again, are you speculating, or is this a fact? I think Citrix XenServer > > >>> 5.7 > > >>> will be released soon :) > > >> Ok, stay and wait. But I repeat: Citrix will focused his efforts only on > > >> Management > > >> and Desktop virtualization, not on servers. First past it is do it: > > >> donate xenserver > > >> to opesource community. > > >> > > > > > > http://blog.xen.org/index.php/2009/11/02/simon-crosby-explains-citrixs-open-source-xenserver-move/ > > > > > > Simon Crosby is the CTO of Citrix/Xensource. > > > > > > Interview here: > > > http://searchservervirtualization.techtarget.com/generic/0,295582,sid94_gci1372894,00.html?asrc=SS_CLA_failover&psrc=CLT_94 > > > > > > Direct MP3 download link of the interview: > > > http://ehg-techtarget.hitbox.com/redirector.mp3?hb=DM560429E9VV83EN3;DM5212204PCA83EN3&cv.c4=DL|PODCAST_twiv1030.mp3&cd=1&n=/podcast=&vcon=/searchServerVirtualization/podcasts&hec=0&vjs=HBX0200u&fn=http://media.techtarget.com/audioCast/DATA_CENTER/twiv1030.mp3&target=http://media.techtarget.com/audioCast/DATA_CENTER/twiv1030.mp3 > > > > > > Quote from the interview (hopefully I got all the words correctly): > > > > > > "Q: Citrix already gives away XenServer for free, so how do you plan > > > to make money in the market, and how would you respond to those who > > > say that by making XenServer free and now mostly opensource, > > > Citrix is basicly conceding the server virtualization market to VMware and > > > Microsoft." > > > > > > "A: Yeah, Anything b
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 09:36:17AM -0500, Ben M. wrote: > I concur with Pasi. Please substantiate claims of fact with links. > Otherwise it is relegated to my phantom fact & rumor mongering folders, > which is where this conversation is heading. Pasi asked several times > for substantiation and I see he requests have been completely ignored or > sidestepped. > > If there is some factual basis to below please supply: > > > A) "Still it isn't official, but Citrix XenServer will disappears soon > ... It will be integrated under Microsoft Hyper-V " > > [Which seems to be awkward since the other way around would be better > (Hyper-V off of XenServer).] > > and the basis of: > > B) "Citrix virtualization bussiness will be focused only on Management > and Desktop virtualization using Hper-V as a first platform and second > VMware." > > Repeating (unsubstantiated statements over and over does not make them > more true or helpful for the list members to stay informed, it is only a > social engineering tool not an answer. Do you have some links to these > statements? > Indeed. In that interview (that I linked) Simon clearly says they're continuing in the server virtualization market, and growing fast. Citrix has doubled XenServer/XenCenter customers from Q1. Also he says the next version of XenServer is coming in the beginning of 2010. -- Pasi > > > Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 01:36:32PM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > >> Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > >>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 01:20:11PM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:27:57AM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > >> Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > >> > Still it isn't official, but Citrix XenServer will disappears soon > ... It will be > integrated under Microsoft Hyper-V > > >>> Uhm.. I don't believe this. Where did you read that? > >>> > >>> Citrix XenServer was opensourced last week, or the hypervisor+tools > >>> part, the xencenter management interface remains closed source (but it > >>> can also manage hyper-v). > >>> > IMHO, it isn't a good option to maintain domO virt servers based on > CentOS or RHEL > now ... It is the time to migrate to another solutions ... > > >>> RHEL5, with Xen, will be fully supported by Redhat until 2014. They > >>> have > >>> clearly stated that many times. > >>> > >>> -- Pasi > >> Ok, I think I haven't explained well, sorry. Citrix Xenserver's > >> hypervisor and tools > >> was donated by Citrix last week, correct. But Citrix didn't release > >> more versions of > >> the product because it does not intend to develop it and apply new > >> features. Citrix > >> virtualization bussiness will be focused only on Management and > >> Desktop > >> virtualization using Hper-V as a first platform and second VMware. > >> > > Where did you read this? You write it like it's a fact - I haven't seen > > that anywhere.. ?? > This will be announced over next weeks ... > > >>> Again, are you speculating, or is this a fact? I think Citrix XenServer > >>> 5.7 > >>> will be released soon :) > >> Ok, stay and wait. But I repeat: Citrix will focused his efforts only on > >> Management > >> and Desktop virtualization, not on servers. First past it is do it: donate > >> xenserver > >> to opesource community. > >> > > > > http://blog.xen.org/index.php/2009/11/02/simon-crosby-explains-citrixs-open-source-xenserver-move/ > > > > Simon Crosby is the CTO of Citrix/Xensource. > > > > Interview here: > > http://searchservervirtualization.techtarget.com/generic/0,295582,sid94_gci1372894,00.html?asrc=SS_CLA_failover&psrc=CLT_94 > > > > Direct MP3 download link of the interview: > > http://ehg-techtarget.hitbox.com/redirector.mp3?hb=DM560429E9VV83EN3;DM5212204PCA83EN3&cv.c4=DL|PODCAST_twiv1030.mp3&cd=1&n=/podcast=&vcon=/searchServerVirtualization/podcasts&hec=0&vjs=HBX0200u&fn=http://media.techtarget.com/audioCast/DATA_CENTER/twiv1030.mp3&target=http://media.techtarget.com/audioCast/DATA_CENTER/twiv1030.mp3 > > > > Quote from the interview (hopefully I got all the words correctly): > > > > "Q: Citrix already gives away XenServer for free, so how do you plan > > to make money in the market, and how would you respond to those who > > say that by making XenServer free and now mostly opensource, > > Citrix is basicly conceding the server virtualization market to VMware and > > Microsoft." > > > > "A: Yeah, Anything but giving it away. > > "A: Last quarter we added 25 000 customers" > > > > Just listen to the interview yourself. > > > > > >>> RHEL5 will be transferred to 'maintenance' mode after a while.. the > >>> feature that are there now will be there in the future aswell. > >>> > >>> Btw. the earlier list of options didn't list Novell SLES11.. it has > >>> pretty goo
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
I concur with Pasi. Please substantiate claims of fact with links. Otherwise it is relegated to my phantom fact & rumor mongering folders, which is where this conversation is heading. Pasi asked several times for substantiation and I see he requests have been completely ignored or sidestepped. If there is some factual basis to below please supply: A) "Still it isn't official, but Citrix XenServer will disappears soon ... It will be integrated under Microsoft Hyper-V " [Which seems to be awkward since the other way around would be better (Hyper-V off of XenServer).] and the basis of: B) "Citrix virtualization bussiness will be focused only on Management and Desktop virtualization using Hper-V as a first platform and second VMware." Repeating (unsubstantiated statements over and over does not make them more true or helpful for the list members to stay informed, it is only a social engineering tool not an answer. Do you have some links to these statements? Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 01:36:32PM +0100, carlopmart wrote: >> Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 01:20:11PM +0100, carlopmart wrote: Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:27:57AM +0100, carlopmart wrote: >> Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: >> Still it isn't official, but Citrix XenServer will disappears soon ... It will be integrated under Microsoft Hyper-V >>> Uhm.. I don't believe this. Where did you read that? >>> >>> Citrix XenServer was opensourced last week, or the hypervisor+tools >>> part, the xencenter management interface remains closed source (but it >>> can also manage hyper-v). >>> IMHO, it isn't a good option to maintain domO virt servers based on CentOS or RHEL now ... It is the time to migrate to another solutions ... >>> RHEL5, with Xen, will be fully supported by Redhat until 2014. They have >>> clearly stated that many times. >>> >>> -- Pasi >> Ok, I think I haven't explained well, sorry. Citrix Xenserver's >> hypervisor and tools >> was donated by Citrix last week, correct. But Citrix didn't release more >> versions of >> the product because it does not intend to develop it and apply new >> features. Citrix >> virtualization bussiness will be focused only on Management and Desktop >> virtualization using Hper-V as a first platform and second VMware. >> > Where did you read this? You write it like it's a fact - I haven't seen > that anywhere.. ?? This will be announced over next weeks ... >>> Again, are you speculating, or is this a fact? I think Citrix XenServer 5.7 >>> will be released soon :) >> Ok, stay and wait. But I repeat: Citrix will focused his efforts only on >> Management >> and Desktop virtualization, not on servers. First past it is do it: donate >> xenserver >> to opesource community. >> > > http://blog.xen.org/index.php/2009/11/02/simon-crosby-explains-citrixs-open-source-xenserver-move/ > > Simon Crosby is the CTO of Citrix/Xensource. > > Interview here: > http://searchservervirtualization.techtarget.com/generic/0,295582,sid94_gci1372894,00.html?asrc=SS_CLA_failover&psrc=CLT_94 > > Direct MP3 download link of the interview: > http://ehg-techtarget.hitbox.com/redirector.mp3?hb=DM560429E9VV83EN3;DM5212204PCA83EN3&cv.c4=DL|PODCAST_twiv1030.mp3&cd=1&n=/podcast=&vcon=/searchServerVirtualization/podcasts&hec=0&vjs=HBX0200u&fn=http://media.techtarget.com/audioCast/DATA_CENTER/twiv1030.mp3&target=http://media.techtarget.com/audioCast/DATA_CENTER/twiv1030.mp3 > > Quote from the interview (hopefully I got all the words correctly): > > "Q: Citrix already gives away XenServer for free, so how do you plan > to make money in the market, and how would you respond to those who > say that by making XenServer free and now mostly opensource, > Citrix is basicly conceding the server virtualization market to VMware and > Microsoft." > > "A: Yeah, Anything but giving it away. > "A: Last quarter we added 25 000 customers" > > Just listen to the interview yourself. > > >>> RHEL5 will be transferred to 'maintenance' mode after a while.. the >>> feature that are there now will be there in the future aswell. >>> >>> Btw. the earlier list of options didn't list Novell SLES11.. it has >>> pretty good implementation of Xen aswell (Xen 3.4.1 + 2.6.27 dom0 kernel). >>> >>> -- Pasi >> I have a serious doubts about Novell and Oracle will do about Xen. We need >> to wait ... >> > > Both Novell and Oracle having been deeply involved in Xen lately, both > are developing and supporting their own products based on Xen. > > -- Pasi > > ___ > CentOS-virt mailing list > CentOS-virt@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt > ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-vir
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
> Both Novell and Oracle having been deeply involved in Xen lately, both > are developing and supporting their own products based on Xen. > > -- Pasi > > ___ > I have no problem with a "better" solution than Xen because to be honest it's a pain sometimes but at this point virtually all enterprise VM deployments are either based on VMware ESX or Xen (Xenserver, VirtualIron, Amazon AWS, Oracle, Sun SVM, Redhat and Suse). This tide will change as KVM becomes more dominant in the VM space but I don't see that happening for a while. I'm also a bit skeptical as to how well a fully virtualized system (KVM) will run in comparison to a fully paravirtualized system (Xen PV). I have a system with 41 VMs on it and I'll be having 2 weeks of planned downtime in the near future. I'd like to see how these systems run under KVM. Grant McWilliams Some people, when confronted with a problem, think "I know, I'll use Windows." Now they have two problems. ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 01:36:32PM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 01:20:11PM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > >> Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > >>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:27:57AM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > >> Still it isn't official, but Citrix XenServer will disappears soon ... > >> It will be > >> integrated under Microsoft Hyper-V > >> > > Uhm.. I don't believe this. Where did you read that? > > > > Citrix XenServer was opensourced last week, or the hypervisor+tools > > part, the xencenter management interface remains closed source (but it > > can also manage hyper-v). > > > >> IMHO, it isn't a good option to maintain domO virt servers based on > >> CentOS or RHEL > >> now ... It is the time to migrate to another solutions ... > >> > > RHEL5, with Xen, will be fully supported by Redhat until 2014. They have > > clearly stated that many times. > > > > -- Pasi > Ok, I think I haven't explained well, sorry. Citrix Xenserver's > hypervisor and tools > was donated by Citrix last week, correct. But Citrix didn't release more > versions of > the product because it does not intend to develop it and apply new > features. Citrix > virtualization bussiness will be focused only on Management and Desktop > virtualization using Hper-V as a first platform and second VMware. > > >>> Where did you read this? You write it like it's a fact - I haven't seen > >>> that anywhere.. ?? > >> This will be announced over next weeks ... > >> > > > > Again, are you speculating, or is this a fact? I think Citrix XenServer 5.7 > > will be released soon :) > > Ok, stay and wait. But I repeat: Citrix will focused his efforts only on > Management > and Desktop virtualization, not on servers. First past it is do it: donate > xenserver > to opesource community. > http://blog.xen.org/index.php/2009/11/02/simon-crosby-explains-citrixs-open-source-xenserver-move/ Simon Crosby is the CTO of Citrix/Xensource. Interview here: http://searchservervirtualization.techtarget.com/generic/0,295582,sid94_gci1372894,00.html?asrc=SS_CLA_failover&psrc=CLT_94 Direct MP3 download link of the interview: http://ehg-techtarget.hitbox.com/redirector.mp3?hb=DM560429E9VV83EN3;DM5212204PCA83EN3&cv.c4=DL|PODCAST_twiv1030.mp3&cd=1&n=/podcast=&vcon=/searchServerVirtualization/podcasts&hec=0&vjs=HBX0200u&fn=http://media.techtarget.com/audioCast/DATA_CENTER/twiv1030.mp3&target=http://media.techtarget.com/audioCast/DATA_CENTER/twiv1030.mp3 Quote from the interview (hopefully I got all the words correctly): "Q: Citrix already gives away XenServer for free, so how do you plan to make money in the market, and how would you respond to those who say that by making XenServer free and now mostly opensource, Citrix is basicly conceding the server virtualization market to VMware and Microsoft." "A: Yeah, Anything but giving it away. "A: Last quarter we added 25 000 customers" Just listen to the interview yourself. > > > > RHEL5 will be transferred to 'maintenance' mode after a while.. the > > feature that are there now will be there in the future aswell. > > > > Btw. the earlier list of options didn't list Novell SLES11.. it has > > pretty good implementation of Xen aswell (Xen 3.4.1 + 2.6.27 dom0 kernel). > > > > -- Pasi > > I have a serious doubts about Novell and Oracle will do about Xen. We need to > wait ... > Both Novell and Oracle having been deeply involved in Xen lately, both are developing and supporting their own products based on Xen. -- Pasi ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] CentOS-5.4, KVM, QEMU, Virt-Manager and kvm-qemu-img
2009/11/10 James B. Byrne : > > On Tue, November 10, 2009 05:34, Kenni Lund wrote: > >> >> Yep, you do want tun/tap. But if you create a regular bridge and >> tells virt-manager or libvirt to use this for your virtual >> machines, virt-manager/libvirt will take care of the tun/tap setup. >> > > This is what I have done. One of difficulties I still have is > discovering where I set the IP addresses for the virtual machines. > It seems that I get some variant of 192.168.122.x where I need an > actual routable address in the 216.185.71.0/24 space. You need to configure your virtual machine to use a shared device, eg. your bridge. If your client gets a 192.168.122.x address, you've setup your virtual machine to use usermode networking. The link which Kai pasted also explains this... Best Regards Kenni ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] CentOS-5.4, KVM, QEMU, Virt-Manager and kvm-qemu-img
On Tue, November 10, 2009 05:34, Kenni Lund wrote: > > Yep, you do want tun/tap. But if you create a regular bridge and > tells virt-manager or libvirt to use this for your virtual > machines, virt-manager/libvirt will take care of the tun/tap setup. > This is what I have done. One of difficulties I still have is discovering where I set the IP addresses for the virtual machines. It seems that I get some variant of 192.168.122.x where I need an actual routable address in the 216.185.71.0/24 space. ifcfg-br0 # kvm virtual host bridged network connection DEVICE=br0 TYPE=Bridge BOOTPROTO=static BROADCAST=216.185.71.255 #HWADDR=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx IPADDR=216.185.71.22 #IPV6INIT=yes #IPV6_AUTOCONF=yes NETMASK=255.255.255.0 NETWORK=216.185.71.0 ONBOOT=yes ifcfg-eth0 # Bridged ethernet for KVM virtual hosts # Intel Corporation 82566DC Gigabit Network Connection DEVICE=eth0 #BOOTPROTO=static #BROADCAST=216.185.71.255 HWADDR=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx #IPADDR=216.185.71.22 #IPV6INIT=yes #IPV6_AUTOCONF=yes #NETMASK=255.255.255.0 #NETWORK=216.185.71.0 ONBOOT=yes BRIDGE=br0 -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James B. Byrnemailto:byrn...@harte-lyne.ca Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3 ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 05:01:46AM -0800, Grant McWilliams wrote: >On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 4:36 AM, carlopmart <[1]carlopm...@gmail.com> >wrote: > > Pasi KÀrkkÀinen wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 01:20:11PM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > >> Pasi KÀrkkÀinen wrote: > >>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:27:57AM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > Pasi KÀrkkÀinen wrote: > > >> Still it isn't official, but Citrix XenServer will disappears > soon ... It will be > >> integrated under Microsoft Hyper-V > >> > > Uhm.. I don't believe this. Where did you read that? > > > > Citrix XenServer was opensourced last week, or the > hypervisor+tools > > part, the xencenter management interface remains closed source > (but it > > can also manage hyper-v). > > > >> IMHO, it isn't a good option to maintain domO virt servers based > on CentOS or RHEL > >> now ... It is the time to migrate to another solutions ... > >> > > RHEL5, with Xen, will be fully supported by Redhat until 2014. > They have > > clearly stated that many times. > > > > -- Pasi > Ok, I think I haven't explained well, sorry. Citrix Xenserver's > hypervisor and tools > was donated by Citrix last week, correct. But Citrix didn't release > more versions of > the product because it does not intend to develop it and apply new > features. Citrix > virtualization bussiness will be focused only on Management and > Desktop > virtualization using Hper-V as a first platform and second VMware. > > >>> Where did you read this? You write it like it's a fact - I haven't > seen > >>> that anywhere.. ?? > >> This will be announced over next weeks ... > >> > > > > Again, are you speculating, or is this a fact? I think Citrix > XenServer 5.7 > > will be released soon :) > > Ok, stay and wait. But I repeat: Citrix will focused his efforts only on > Management > and Desktop virtualization, not on servers. First past it is do it: > donate xenserver > to opesource community. > >If this is true it will not only be the death of Xen but of Citrix as >well. I don't see a company surviving that only makes a gui to manage >someone else's VM solution. I think Microsoft is capable of making their >own GUI. > I think that was just speculation. It doesn't make much sense to me. Time will show :) > >I do think that we should probably just give up on getting xen in the >kernel for Dom0. It's clear that the kernel guys will never let this >happen. Xen _hypervisor_ doesn't need to be in the kernel - that's the whole point. Xen hypervisor is external piece, maintained (and updated) separately from the dom0 kernel. pv_ops Xen dom0 kernel patches are currently in the process of being cleaned up to be acceptable for upstream inclusion. That has taken longer than originally thought, ie. more changes had to be done after the previous attempt of upstreaming. Jeremy will have a talk about pv_ops dom0 status and plans this month at Xen Summit (in China, at Intel's facility). http://blog.xen.org/index.php/2009/11/04/xen-summit-asia-2009-event-information-released/ > Xen may very well become a distribution providing a Dom0. The DomU >stuff is already in the kernel so a very light distribution that only >provides networking tools, security tools and the Dom0 code would be fine >for those who want to continue using Xen. I've not been convinced that KVM >is quite ready to do what Xen does. I use it but not for production. > The newly opensourced XenServer could be developed to be something like this.. There's also a recent project to develop web management interface for XenServer: http://blog.xen.org/index.php/2009/11/09/project-xvp/ -- Pasi ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 4:36 AM, carlopmart wrote: > Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 01:20:11PM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > >> Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > >>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:27:57AM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > >> Still it isn't official, but Citrix XenServer will disappears soon > ... It will be > >> integrated under Microsoft Hyper-V > >> > > Uhm.. I don't believe this. Where did you read that? > > > > Citrix XenServer was opensourced last week, or the hypervisor+tools > > part, the xencenter management interface remains closed source (but > it > > can also manage hyper-v). > > > >> IMHO, it isn't a good option to maintain domO virt servers based on > CentOS or RHEL > >> now ... It is the time to migrate to another solutions ... > >> > > RHEL5, with Xen, will be fully supported by Redhat until 2014. They > have > > clearly stated that many times. > > > > -- Pasi > Ok, I think I haven't explained well, sorry. Citrix Xenserver's > hypervisor and tools > was donated by Citrix last week, correct. But Citrix didn't release > more versions of > the product because it does not intend to develop it and apply new > features. Citrix > virtualization bussiness will be focused only on Management and > Desktop > virtualization using Hper-V as a first platform and second VMware. > > >>> Where did you read this? You write it like it's a fact - I haven't seen > >>> that anywhere.. ?? > >> This will be announced over next weeks ... > >> > > > > Again, are you speculating, or is this a fact? I think Citrix XenServer > 5.7 > > will be released soon :) > > Ok, stay and wait. But I repeat: Citrix will focused his efforts only on > Management > and Desktop virtualization, not on servers. First past it is do it: donate > xenserver > to opesource community. > > If this is true it will not only be the death of Xen but of Citrix as well. I don't see a company surviving that only makes a gui to manage someone else's VM solution. I think Microsoft is capable of making their own GUI. I do think that we should probably just give up on getting xen in the kernel for Dom0. It's clear that the kernel guys will never let this happen. Xen may very well become a distribution providing a Dom0. The DomU stuff is already in the kernel so a very light distribution that only provides networking tools, security tools and the Dom0 code would be fine for those who want to continue using Xen. I've not been convinced that KVM is quite ready to do what Xen does. I use it but not for production. Grant McWilliams Some people, when confronted with a problem, think "I know, I'll use Windows." Now they have two problems. ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 01:20:11PM +0100, carlopmart wrote:
>> Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:27:57AM +0100, carlopmart wrote:
Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
>> Still it isn't official, but Citrix XenServer will disappears soon ...
>> It will be
>> integrated under Microsoft Hyper-V
>>
> Uhm.. I don't believe this. Where did you read that?
>
> Citrix XenServer was opensourced last week, or the hypervisor+tools
> part, the xencenter management interface remains closed source (but it
> can also manage hyper-v).
>
>> IMHO, it isn't a good option to maintain domO virt servers based on
>> CentOS or RHEL
>> now ... It is the time to migrate to another solutions ...
>>
> RHEL5, with Xen, will be fully supported by Redhat until 2014. They have
> clearly stated that many times.
>
> -- Pasi
Ok, I think I haven't explained well, sorry. Citrix Xenserver's hypervisor
and tools
was donated by Citrix last week, correct. But Citrix didn't release more
versions of
the product because it does not intend to develop it and apply new
features. Citrix
virtualization bussiness will be focused only on Management and Desktop
virtualization using Hper-V as a first platform and second VMware.
>>> Where did you read this? You write it like it's a fact - I haven't seen
>>> that anywhere.. ??
>> This will be announced over next weeks ...
>>
>
> Again, are you speculating, or is this a fact? I think Citrix XenServer 5.7
> will be released soon :)
Ok, stay and wait. But I repeat: Citrix will focused his efforts only on
Management
and Desktop virtualization, not on servers. First past it is do it: donate
xenserver
to opesource community.
>
And correct, RHEL5 Xen will be supported till 2014, but did you use a
technology
that upstream doesn't put the necessary resources to mantain and apply new
features??
RedHat virtaulziation efforts are focused at 99% on KVM solutions, for Xen
only
applies security updates and nothing else.
>>> That's not true. Upcoming RHEL 5.5 will have Xen-related bugfixes as usual.
>>>
>>> -- Pasi
>>>
>> Bugfixes and security updates only, but what about new features like XCI,
>> RAS
>> fetures, etc?? Do you really think they are going to be ported by RedHat on
>> his
>> xen?? I think not.
>>
>
> XCI has nothing to do with using Xen on servers. And yes, big new
> features most probably won't be ported to RHEL5.
>
> RHEL5 will be transferred to 'maintenance' mode after a while.. the
> feature that are there now will be there in the future aswell.
>
> Btw. the earlier list of options didn't list Novell SLES11.. it has
> pretty good implementation of Xen aswell (Xen 3.4.1 + 2.6.27 dom0 kernel).
>
> -- Pasi
I have a serious doubts about Novell and Oracle will do about Xen. We need to
wait ...
>
> ___
> CentOS-virt mailing list
> CentOS-virt@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
>
--
CL Martinez
carlopmart {at} gmail {d0t} com
___
CentOS-virt mailing list
CentOS-virt@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 01:20:11PM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:27:57AM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > >> Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > >> > Still it isn't official, but Citrix XenServer will disappears soon ... > It will be > integrated under Microsoft Hyper-V > > >>> Uhm.. I don't believe this. Where did you read that? > >>> > >>> Citrix XenServer was opensourced last week, or the hypervisor+tools > >>> part, the xencenter management interface remains closed source (but it > >>> can also manage hyper-v). > >>> > IMHO, it isn't a good option to maintain domO virt servers based on > CentOS or RHEL > now ... It is the time to migrate to another solutions ... > > >>> RHEL5, with Xen, will be fully supported by Redhat until 2014. They have > >>> clearly stated that many times. > >>> > >>> -- Pasi > >> Ok, I think I haven't explained well, sorry. Citrix Xenserver's hypervisor > >> and tools > >> was donated by Citrix last week, correct. But Citrix didn't release more > >> versions of > >> the product because it does not intend to develop it and apply new > >> features. Citrix > >> virtualization bussiness will be focused only on Management and Desktop > >> virtualization using Hper-V as a first platform and second VMware. > >> > > > > Where did you read this? You write it like it's a fact - I haven't seen > > that anywhere.. ?? > > This will be announced over next weeks ... > Again, are you speculating, or is this a fact? I think Citrix XenServer 5.7 will be released soon :) > > > >> And correct, RHEL5 Xen will be supported till 2014, but did you use a > >> technology > >> that upstream doesn't put the necessary resources to mantain and apply new > >> features?? > >> > >> RedHat virtaulziation efforts are focused at 99% on KVM solutions, for Xen > >> only > >> applies security updates and nothing else. > >> > > > > That's not true. Upcoming RHEL 5.5 will have Xen-related bugfixes as usual. > > > > -- Pasi > > > > Bugfixes and security updates only, but what about new features like XCI, RAS > fetures, etc?? Do you really think they are going to be ported by RedHat on > his > xen?? I think not. > XCI has nothing to do with using Xen on servers. And yes, big new features most probably won't be ported to RHEL5. RHEL5 will be transferred to 'maintenance' mode after a while.. the feature that are there now will be there in the future aswell. Btw. the earlier list of options didn't list Novell SLES11.. it has pretty good implementation of Xen aswell (Xen 3.4.1 + 2.6.27 dom0 kernel). -- Pasi ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:27:57AM +0100, carlopmart wrote:
>> Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
>>
Still it isn't official, but Citrix XenServer will disappears soon ... It
will be
integrated under Microsoft Hyper-V
>>> Uhm.. I don't believe this. Where did you read that?
>>>
>>> Citrix XenServer was opensourced last week, or the hypervisor+tools
>>> part, the xencenter management interface remains closed source (but it
>>> can also manage hyper-v).
>>>
IMHO, it isn't a good option to maintain domO virt servers based on CentOS
or RHEL
now ... It is the time to migrate to another solutions ...
>>> RHEL5, with Xen, will be fully supported by Redhat until 2014. They have
>>> clearly stated that many times.
>>>
>>> -- Pasi
>> Ok, I think I haven't explained well, sorry. Citrix Xenserver's hypervisor
>> and tools
>> was donated by Citrix last week, correct. But Citrix didn't release more
>> versions of
>> the product because it does not intend to develop it and apply new features.
>> Citrix
>> virtualization bussiness will be focused only on Management and Desktop
>> virtualization using Hper-V as a first platform and second VMware.
>>
>
> Where did you read this? You write it like it's a fact - I haven't seen
> that anywhere.. ??
This will be announced over next weeks ...
>
>> And correct, RHEL5 Xen will be supported till 2014, but did you use a
>> technology
>> that upstream doesn't put the necessary resources to mantain and apply new
>> features??
>>
>> RedHat virtaulziation efforts are focused at 99% on KVM solutions, for Xen
>> only
>> applies security updates and nothing else.
>>
>
> That's not true. Upcoming RHEL 5.5 will have Xen-related bugfixes as usual.
>
> -- Pasi
>
Bugfixes and security updates only, but what about new features like XCI, RAS
fetures, etc?? Do you really think they are going to be ported by RedHat on his
xen?? I think not.
> ___
> CentOS-virt mailing list
> CentOS-virt@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
>
--
CL Martinez
carlopmart {at} gmail {d0t} com
___
CentOS-virt mailing list
CentOS-virt@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:45:44AM +0100, Frederic SOULIER wrote: > Correct me if i'm wrong. > If rhel6 propose domU version that would say that a dom0 rhel5.X version > will be able to run rhel6 domU ? > Yes. That's how I've understood things. RHEL 5.4 can run already today Fedora 12 Xen PV domU. RHEL6 will be based on F12 (afaik). -- Pasi > Pasi Kärkkäinen a écrit : > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:39:35AM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > > > >> Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > >> > >>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:11:24AM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > >>> > Frederic SOULIER wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Do you really think that RHEL6 will not include dom0 version ? > > > Yes, Xen Dom0 will be never supported from RHEL6, onlu domU ... > > > It seems that KVM will be the favorite for redhat virtualisation but i > > think Xen is actually largely deployed. > > We have here a "cluster" of ten Xen centos 5.4 dom0 and i'm asking what > > it will become with RHEL6 if there is no more dom0 version. > > > Well, you have several options: > > - Migrate to KVM > - Migrate to Oracle VM > - Migrate to Windows Hyper-V > - Migrate to VMware > > > >>> Or to Citrix XenServer. > >>> Or run your own dom0 setup.. if self-support is an option :) > >>> Or keep running RHEL5.x on dom0, that'll be supported for a long time > >>> still. > >>> > >>> > >> Still it isn't official, but Citrix XenServer will disappears soon ... It > >> will be > >> integrated under Microsoft Hyper-V > >> > >> > > > > Uhm.. I don't believe this. Where did you read that? > > > > Citrix XenServer was opensourced last week, or the hypervisor+tools > > part, the xencenter management interface remains closed source (but it > > can also manage hyper-v). > > > > > >> IMHO, it isn't a good option to maintain domO virt servers based on CentOS > >> or RHEL > >> now ... It is the time to migrate to another solutions ... > >> > >> > > > > RHEL5, with Xen, will be fully supported by Redhat until 2014. They have > > clearly stated that many times. > > > > -- Pasi > > > > ___ > > CentOS-virt mailing list > > CentOS-virt@centos.org > > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt > > > > > > -- > Frederic Soulier > > DSI / STAR > Universite Toulouse 1 Capitole > 2 RUE DU DOYEN GABRIEL MARTY > 31042 TOULOUSE CEDEX 9 FRANCE > Tel : +33 5 61 63 39 98 > Fax : +33 5 61 63 37 98 / Bureau : AR38 bis > http://dsi.univ-tlse1.fr > > ___ > 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
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 11:27:57AM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > >> Still it isn't official, but Citrix XenServer will disappears soon ... It > >> will be > >> integrated under Microsoft Hyper-V > >> > > > > Uhm.. I don't believe this. Where did you read that? > > > > Citrix XenServer was opensourced last week, or the hypervisor+tools > > part, the xencenter management interface remains closed source (but it > > can also manage hyper-v). > > > >> IMHO, it isn't a good option to maintain domO virt servers based on CentOS > >> or RHEL > >> now ... It is the time to migrate to another solutions ... > >> > > > > RHEL5, with Xen, will be fully supported by Redhat until 2014. They have > > clearly stated that many times. > > > > -- Pasi > > Ok, I think I haven't explained well, sorry. Citrix Xenserver's hypervisor > and tools > was donated by Citrix last week, correct. But Citrix didn't release more > versions of > the product because it does not intend to develop it and apply new features. > Citrix > virtualization bussiness will be focused only on Management and Desktop > virtualization using Hper-V as a first platform and second VMware. > Where did you read this? You write it like it's a fact - I haven't seen that anywhere.. ?? > And correct, RHEL5 Xen will be supported till 2014, but did you use a > technology > that upstream doesn't put the necessary resources to mantain and apply new > features?? > > RedHat virtaulziation efforts are focused at 99% on KVM solutions, for Xen > only > applies security updates and nothing else. > That's not true. Upcoming RHEL 5.5 will have Xen-related bugfixes as usual. -- Pasi ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] CentOS-5.4, KVM, QEMU, Virt-Manager and kvm-qemu-img
James B. Byrne wrote on Mon, 9 Nov 2009 20:58:18 -0500 (EST): > So, it would appear as if kvm-qemu-img is intended as a lightweight > replacement for the full qemu package where all the functionality of > the latter is not required. However, as I wish to use virt-manager > clearly the full qemu package is required. http://wiki.centos.org/HowTos/KVM Did you read this? As I told elsewhere I'm not using KVM. This article is outdated but it says that qemu is not needed. I would be surprised if it was needed now. I have used virt-manager for Xen and didn't need qemu. If I attempt to install virt-manager and kvm it doesn't pull in qemu for me. So, my conclusion would be that qemu isn't needed. The qemu-kvm/qemu-kvm- img is only necessary if you want to use an image file. It is just able to create the image file, it's only a small tool from the whole qemu package. You certainly don't need the whole package. qemu is on lose terms "the same" as KVM - e.g. it is another hypervisor/emulator. You just need one. Until you get better help from someone running kvm on 5.4, have you temporarily disabled SElinux to see if that makes it work? If it still doesn't work I guess there's something wrong with your setup. There's also a Virtualization Guide for RHEL and I expect it to include KVM instructions now that KVM is part of RHEL. The 5.4 documents are not yet on the CentOS site, so you have to check on the RH site for it. Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
Correct me if i'm wrong. If rhel6 propose domU version that would say that a dom0 rhel5.X version will be able to run rhel6 domU ? Pasi Kärkkäinen a écrit : > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:39:35AM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > >> Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:11:24AM +0100, carlopmart wrote: >>> Frederic SOULIER wrote: > Hi, > > Do you really think that RHEL6 will not include dom0 version ? > Yes, Xen Dom0 will be never supported from RHEL6, onlu domU ... > It seems that KVM will be the favorite for redhat virtualisation but i > think Xen is actually largely deployed. > We have here a "cluster" of ten Xen centos 5.4 dom0 and i'm asking what > it will become with RHEL6 if there is no more dom0 version. > Well, you have several options: - Migrate to KVM - Migrate to Oracle VM - Migrate to Windows Hyper-V - Migrate to VMware >>> Or to Citrix XenServer. >>> Or run your own dom0 setup.. if self-support is an option :) >>> Or keep running RHEL5.x on dom0, that'll be supported for a long time >>> still. >>> >>> >> Still it isn't official, but Citrix XenServer will disappears soon ... It >> will be >> integrated under Microsoft Hyper-V >> >> > > Uhm.. I don't believe this. Where did you read that? > > Citrix XenServer was opensourced last week, or the hypervisor+tools > part, the xencenter management interface remains closed source (but it > can also manage hyper-v). > > >> IMHO, it isn't a good option to maintain domO virt servers based on CentOS >> or RHEL >> now ... It is the time to migrate to another solutions ... >> >> > > RHEL5, with Xen, will be fully supported by Redhat until 2014. They have > clearly stated that many times. > > -- Pasi > > ___ > CentOS-virt mailing list > CentOS-virt@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt > > -- Frederic Soulier DSI / STAR Universite Toulouse 1 Capitole 2 RUE DU DOYEN GABRIEL MARTY 31042 TOULOUSE CEDEX 9 FRANCE Tel : +33 5 61 63 39 98 Fax : +33 5 61 63 37 98 / Bureau : AR38 bis http://dsi.univ-tlse1.fr ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] CentOS-5.4, KVM, QEMU, Virt-Manager and kvm-qemu-img
2009/11/9 James B. Byrne : > Further, do I need tun/tap to host VMs that themselves support > virtual ips? The module for tun I found as part of the base install. > But I cannot locate the module for ethertap and yum does not tell > me where it is found. Yep, you do want tun/tap. But if you create a regular bridge and tells virt-manager or libvirt to use this for your virtual machines, virt-manager/libvirt will take care of the tun/tap setup. >From your virtual machines point of view, tun/tap will get you the same connectivity as if you plugged a ethernet cable from your network into it, without any restrictions. Best Regards Kenni ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
>> Still it isn't official, but Citrix XenServer will disappears soon ... It
>> will be
>> integrated under Microsoft Hyper-V
>>
>
> Uhm.. I don't believe this. Where did you read that?
>
> Citrix XenServer was opensourced last week, or the hypervisor+tools
> part, the xencenter management interface remains closed source (but it
> can also manage hyper-v).
>
>> IMHO, it isn't a good option to maintain domO virt servers based on CentOS
>> or RHEL
>> now ... It is the time to migrate to another solutions ...
>>
>
> RHEL5, with Xen, will be fully supported by Redhat until 2014. They have
> clearly stated that many times.
>
> -- Pasi
Ok, I think I haven't explained well, sorry. Citrix Xenserver's hypervisor and
tools
was donated by Citrix last week, correct. But Citrix didn't release more
versions of
the product because it does not intend to develop it and apply new features.
Citrix
virtualization bussiness will be focused only on Management and Desktop
virtualization using Hper-V as a first platform and second VMware.
And correct, RHEL5 Xen will be supported till 2014, but did you use a
technology
that upstream doesn't put the necessary resources to mantain and apply new
features??
RedHat virtaulziation efforts are focused at 99% on KVM solutions, for Xen only
applies security updates and nothing else.
best regards.
--
CL Martinez
carlopmart {at} gmail {d0t} com
___
CentOS-virt mailing list
CentOS-virt@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] CentOS-5.4, KVM, QEMU, Virt-Manager and kvm-qemu-img
2009/11/10 James B. Byrne : > > So, it would appear as if kvm-qemu-img is intended as a lightweight > replacement for the full qemu package where all the functionality of > the latter is not required. However, as I wish to use virt-manager > clearly the full qemu package is required. No, it's not a replacement, it's a utility for handling image files, eg. create and convert harddisk images for QEMU/KVM. If you just install kvm libvirt virt-manager and all their dependencies, then you should be fine. Best Regards Kenni ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:39:35AM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:11:24AM +0100, carlopmart wrote: > >> Frederic SOULIER wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> Do you really think that RHEL6 will not include dom0 version ? > >> Yes, Xen Dom0 will be never supported from RHEL6, onlu domU ... > >>> It seems that KVM will be the favorite for redhat virtualisation but i > >>> think Xen is actually largely deployed. > >>> We have here a "cluster" of ten Xen centos 5.4 dom0 and i'm asking what > >>> it will become with RHEL6 if there is no more dom0 version. > >> Well, you have several options: > >> > >> - Migrate to KVM > >> - Migrate to Oracle VM > >> - Migrate to Windows Hyper-V > >> - Migrate to VMware > >> > > > > Or to Citrix XenServer. > > Or run your own dom0 setup.. if self-support is an option :) > > Or keep running RHEL5.x on dom0, that'll be supported for a long time > > still. > > > Still it isn't official, but Citrix XenServer will disappears soon ... It > will be > integrated under Microsoft Hyper-V > Uhm.. I don't believe this. Where did you read that? Citrix XenServer was opensourced last week, or the hypervisor+tools part, the xencenter management interface remains closed source (but it can also manage hyper-v). > IMHO, it isn't a good option to maintain domO virt servers based on CentOS or > RHEL > now ... It is the time to migrate to another solutions ... > RHEL5, with Xen, will be fully supported by Redhat until 2014. They have clearly stated that many times. -- Pasi ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:11:24AM +0100, carlopmart wrote:
>> Frederic SOULIER wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Do you really think that RHEL6 will not include dom0 version ?
>> Yes, Xen Dom0 will be never supported from RHEL6, onlu domU ...
>>> It seems that KVM will be the favorite for redhat virtualisation but i
>>> think Xen is actually largely deployed.
>>> We have here a "cluster" of ten Xen centos 5.4 dom0 and i'm asking what
>>> it will become with RHEL6 if there is no more dom0 version.
>> Well, you have several options:
>>
>> - Migrate to KVM
>> - Migrate to Oracle VM
>> - Migrate to Windows Hyper-V
>> - Migrate to VMware
>>
>
> Or to Citrix XenServer.
> Or run your own dom0 setup.. if self-support is an option :)
> Or keep running RHEL5.x on dom0, that'll be supported for a long time
> still.
>
Still it isn't official, but Citrix XenServer will disappears soon ... It will
be
integrated under Microsoft Hyper-V
IMHO, it isn't a good option to maintain domO virt servers based on CentOS or
RHEL
now ... It is the time to migrate to another solutions ...
--
CL Martinez
carlopmart {at} gmail {d0t} com
___
CentOS-virt mailing list
CentOS-virt@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] Migrating from KVM to XEN - kernel panic
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:20:35AM +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote: > On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 10:55:48AM -0800, Christopher Hunt wrote: > >Pasi, > > Thanks very much for the tip. That did give me some additional > >information: > > > >Scanning and configuring dmraid supported devices > >Scanning logical volumes > > Reading all physical volumes. This may take a while... > >Activating logical volumes > > Volume group "virt01vg00" not found > >Creating root device. > >Mounting root filesystem. > >mount: could not find filesystem '/dev/root' > >Setting up other filesystems. > >Setting up new root fs > >setuproot: moving /dev failed: No such file or directory > >no fstab.sys, mounting internal defaults > >setuproot: error mounting /proc: No such file or directory > >setuproot: error mounting /sys: No such file or directory > >Switching to new root and running init. > >unmounting old /dev > >unmounting old /proc > >unmounting old /sys > >switchroot: mount failed: No such file or directory > >Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill init! > >This brings me back to suspecting the problem is in the different file > >structures. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the other replies in > >this thread. > > > > Uhmm.. yeah. Sounds like the initrd image is wrong (not correct when > running as Xen PV guest so it's not setting up the root device properly). > > I recommend take a full backup of the KVM guest disk image, and then continue > with these steps. > > The easiest way should be, when still running under KVM, to do this in > the guest: > > - backup /etc/modprobe.conf: cp -a /etc/modprobe.conf > /etc/modprobe.conf.backup.kvm > - edit /etc/modprobe.conf and remove scsi_hostadapter and eth0 lines > - add these lines: > alias eth0 xennet > alias scsi_hostadapter xenblk > > Those changes will make mkinitrd include the correct drivers to initrd > image. > > Now let's continue in the guest: > > - backup /etc/fstab: cp -a /etc/fstab /etc/fstab.backup.kvm > - edit /etc/fstab > - rename /dev/sd* to /dev/xvd* (sda1 becomes xvda1) > > Xen paravirtual guest disks will be called /dev/xvd* > > Now, install kernel-xen: yum install kernel-xen > > After installation check /boot/grub/grub.conf and verify that > kernel-xen is the default entry. Also verify the root path kernel > parameter is correct. Also check the initrd filename for > kernel-xen, since we'll re-create the initrd image. > > Then create a backup of the kernel-xen initrd image: > cp -a /boot/initrd-2.6.18-version.img /boot/initrd-2.6.18-version-backup.img > > Then re-create the kernel-xen initrd image, so we can verify it looks correct > for a Xen guest: > > mkinitrd -v -f /boot/initrd-2.6.18-version.img 2.6.18-version > > >From the mkinitrd output verify that it includes xenblk and xennet > drivers (as specified in /etc/modprobe.conf). > > After this shutdown the KVM guest, copy the disk image to Xen host, > create a Xen configuration file for the guest, and make it use pygrub > bootloader to load grub settings, kernel and initrd from the guest disk. > and try starting it.. > > (if it still fails, I recommend unpacking the initrd image [1], and > reading the init script to see where it goes wrong). > And here's example /etc/xen/ cfgfile: name = "testvm" uuid = "9cf2267d-2513-b6b7-b9d9-19e1962c7bd6" maxmem = 1024 memory = 1024 vcpus = 1 bootloader = "/usr/bin/pygrub" on_poweroff = "destroy" on_reboot = "restart" on_crash = "restart" disk = [ "tap:aio:/var/lib/xen/images/testvm.img,xvda,w" ] vif = [ "mac=00:16:1a:2a:ef:56,bridge=virbr0" ] or if you're using LVM volumes as storage, then change tap:aio: to phy: Hopefully those help. -- Pasi > Good luck :) > > > [1] mkdir /tmp/foo && cd /tmp/foo && zcat /boot/initrd-foo.img | cpio -i -d > > >On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen <[1]pa...@iki.fi> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 11:49:41AM -0800, Christopher Hunt wrote: > > >First let me say that I'm not a sysadmin, but am simply wearing > > that hat > > >this week so please excuse my ignorance. I need to temporarily > > move some > > >virtual servers from a CentOS-KVM platform to a CentOS-XEN > > platform > > while > > >I do some upgrades to the CentOS box. I've created a local LV, > > and > > used > > >DD and SCP to transfer the block device from the VKM machine to > > the > > XEN > > >machine. For quite a while I struggled with the "Error: (2, > > 'Invalid > > >kernel', 'xc_dom_parse_elf_kernel: ELF image has no shstrtab\n')" > > error > > >but thanks to Nick Couchman from > > > > > > > [1][2]http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-users/2008-03/msg00603.html, > > >I've passed that. Now I'm stuck with a kernel panic situation. > > >Unfortunately the
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:11:24AM +0100, carlopmart wrote:
> Frederic SOULIER wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Do you really think that RHEL6 will not include dom0 version ?
> Yes, Xen Dom0 will be never supported from RHEL6, onlu domU ...
> > It seems that KVM will be the favorite for redhat virtualisation but i
> > think Xen is actually largely deployed.
> > We have here a "cluster" of ten Xen centos 5.4 dom0 and i'm asking what
> > it will become with RHEL6 if there is no more dom0 version.
> Well, you have several options:
>
> - Migrate to KVM
> - Migrate to Oracle VM
> - Migrate to Windows Hyper-V
> - Migrate to VMware
>
Or to Citrix XenServer.
Or run your own dom0 setup.. if self-support is an option :)
Or keep running RHEL5.x on dom0, that'll be supported for a long time
still.
-- Pasi
> .. or your dom0 cluster will be unsupported
>
> > We think about migration from Xen to KVM but the process could be
> > complex and i don't know if kvm will equal Xen performance for
> > production use.
> > Anyone as the same problem/question here.
>
> I have do it some tests using KVM under rhel5.4 and perfromance it is very
> very high
> ... but only for rhel5.x guests. For Windows versions or solaris/opensolaris
> systems
> performance is ver very poor until they released virtio drivers for these
> platforms ...
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> CL Martinez
> carlopmart {at} gmail {d0t} com
> ___
> 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
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 09:53:24AM +0100, Frederic SOULIER wrote: > Hi, > > Do you really think that RHEL6 will not include dom0 version ? > It seems that KVM will be the favorite for redhat virtualisation but i > think Xen is actually largely deployed. > Well.. I don't have any facts.. And yes, Xen is largely deployed, and good solution. I use it myself, just like many others. > We have here a "cluster" of ten Xen centos 5.4 dom0 and i'm asking what > it will become with RHEL6 if there is no more dom0 version. > We think about migration from Xen to KVM but the process could be > complex and i don't know if kvm will equal Xen performance for > production use. > Anyone as the same problem/question here. > I guess we'll just have to wait.. or contact RH folks and ask/push it :) -- Pasi > Regards > > > > Pasi Kärkkäinen a écrit : > > On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 04:45:56PM +0100, Hildebrand, Nils, 232 wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> my local RH-salesman told me that rh6 will be based on a mix of Fedora > >> 11/12 - so I hope for the best. > >> > >> > > > > Yeah, RHEL6 will be based on Fedora 12 (afaik). > > Also, I think RHEL6 will support running as Xen guest (PV domU), but I > > don't think they're going to ship dom0 with it.. > > > > I really hope they would, but I'm not holding my breath considering how > > much they talk about KVM.. > > > > > >> At the moment I am stuck with SLES (currently 10) on our Dom0-servers, > >> since it has the newer XEN-version. > >> I would love to move to RH or CentOS with my Dom0s... > >> > >> > > > > Upgrade to SLES11 at least then.. I think it has Xen 3.4.1 available and > > 2.6.27 dom0 kernel. > > > > -- Pasi > > > > > >> Kind regards > >> > >> Nils > >> > >> > >> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: centos-virt-boun...@centos.org > >>> [mailto:centos-virt-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Pasi Kärkkäinen > >>> Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 3:58 PM > >>> To: Discussion about the virtualization on CentOS > >>> Subject: Re: [CentOS-virt] High CPU usage when running > >>> aCentOSguestinVirtualBox > >>> > >>> On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 12:47:08PM +0100, Hildebrand, Nils, 232 wrote: > >>> > Hi, > > this weekend I took a closer look at KVM. I think that the > > >>> paravirtualized XEN or Hyper-V-Approach is superior to the > >>> full virtualization. > >>> > >>> PV has it's advantages.. > >>> > >>> > Red Hat 6 will have XEN-Support (propably XEN 3.4 with > > >>> power-consumption savings). > >>> > >>> What did you hear this? Is it a fact? > >>> > >>> -- Pasi > >>> > >>> > >>> ___ > >>> 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 > >> > > ___ > > CentOS-virt mailing list > > CentOS-virt@centos.org > > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt > > > > > > -- > Frederic Soulier > > DSI / STAR > Universite Toulouse 1 Capitole > 2 RUE DU DOYEN GABRIEL MARTY > 31042 TOULOUSE CEDEX 9 FRANCE > Tel : +33 5 61 63 39 98 > Fax : +33 5 61 63 37 98 / Bureau : AR38 bis > http://dsi.univ-tlse1.fr > > ___ > 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
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
Frederic SOULIER wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Do you really think that RHEL6 will not include dom0 version ?
Yes, Xen Dom0 will be never supported from RHEL6, onlu domU ...
> It seems that KVM will be the favorite for redhat virtualisation but i
> think Xen is actually largely deployed.
> We have here a "cluster" of ten Xen centos 5.4 dom0 and i'm asking what
> it will become with RHEL6 if there is no more dom0 version.
Well, you have several options:
- Migrate to KVM
- Migrate to Oracle VM
- Migrate to Windows Hyper-V
- Migrate to VMware
.. or your dom0 cluster will be unsupported
> We think about migration from Xen to KVM but the process could be
> complex and i don't know if kvm will equal Xen performance for
> production use.
> Anyone as the same problem/question here.
I have do it some tests using KVM under rhel5.4 and perfromance it is very very
high
... but only for rhel5.x guests. For Windows versions or solaris/opensolaris
systems
performance is ver very poor until they released virtio drivers for these
platforms ...
>
> Regards
>
>
>
--
CL Martinez
carlopmart {at} gmail {d0t} com
___
CentOS-virt mailing list
CentOS-virt@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
Hi, Do you really think that RHEL6 will not include dom0 version ? It seems that KVM will be the favorite for redhat virtualisation but i think Xen is actually largely deployed. We have here a "cluster" of ten Xen centos 5.4 dom0 and i'm asking what it will become with RHEL6 if there is no more dom0 version. We think about migration from Xen to KVM but the process could be complex and i don't know if kvm will equal Xen performance for production use. Anyone as the same problem/question here. Regards Pasi Kärkkäinen a écrit : > On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 04:45:56PM +0100, Hildebrand, Nils, 232 wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> my local RH-salesman told me that rh6 will be based on a mix of Fedora 11/12 >> - so I hope for the best. >> >> > > Yeah, RHEL6 will be based on Fedora 12 (afaik). > Also, I think RHEL6 will support running as Xen guest (PV domU), but I > don't think they're going to ship dom0 with it.. > > I really hope they would, but I'm not holding my breath considering how > much they talk about KVM.. > > >> At the moment I am stuck with SLES (currently 10) on our Dom0-servers, since >> it has the newer XEN-version. >> I would love to move to RH or CentOS with my Dom0s... >> >> > > Upgrade to SLES11 at least then.. I think it has Xen 3.4.1 available and > 2.6.27 dom0 kernel. > > -- Pasi > > >> Kind regards >> >> Nils >> >> >> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: centos-virt-boun...@centos.org >>> [mailto:centos-virt-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Pasi Kärkkäinen >>> Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 3:58 PM >>> To: Discussion about the virtualization on CentOS >>> Subject: Re: [CentOS-virt] High CPU usage when running >>> aCentOSguestinVirtualBox >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 12:47:08PM +0100, Hildebrand, Nils, 232 wrote: >>> Hi, this weekend I took a closer look at KVM. I think that the >>> paravirtualized XEN or Hyper-V-Approach is superior to the >>> full virtualization. >>> >>> PV has it's advantages.. >>> >>> Red Hat 6 will have XEN-Support (propably XEN 3.4 with >>> power-consumption savings). >>> >>> What did you hear this? Is it a fact? >>> >>> -- Pasi >>> >>> >>> ___ >>> 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 >> > ___ > CentOS-virt mailing list > CentOS-virt@centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt > > -- Frederic Soulier DSI / STAR Universite Toulouse 1 Capitole 2 RUE DU DOYEN GABRIEL MARTY 31042 TOULOUSE CEDEX 9 FRANCE Tel : +33 5 61 63 39 98 Fax : +33 5 61 63 37 98 / Bureau : AR38 bis http://dsi.univ-tlse1.fr ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
Re: [CentOS-virt] Migrating from KVM to XEN - kernel panic
On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 10:55:48AM -0800, Christopher Hunt wrote: >Pasi, > Thanks very much for the tip. That did give me some additional >information: > >Scanning and configuring dmraid supported devices >Scanning logical volumes > Reading all physical volumes. This may take a while... >Activating logical volumes > Volume group "virt01vg00" not found >Creating root device. >Mounting root filesystem. >mount: could not find filesystem '/dev/root' >Setting up other filesystems. >Setting up new root fs >setuproot: moving /dev failed: No such file or directory >no fstab.sys, mounting internal defaults >setuproot: error mounting /proc: No such file or directory >setuproot: error mounting /sys: No such file or directory >Switching to new root and running init. >unmounting old /dev >unmounting old /proc >unmounting old /sys >switchroot: mount failed: No such file or directory >Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill init! >This brings me back to suspecting the problem is in the different file >structures. I'm still trying to wrap my head around the other replies in >this thread. > Uhmm.. yeah. Sounds like the initrd image is wrong (not correct when running as Xen PV guest so it's not setting up the root device properly). I recommend take a full backup of the KVM guest disk image, and then continue with these steps. The easiest way should be, when still running under KVM, to do this in the guest: - backup /etc/modprobe.conf: cp -a /etc/modprobe.conf /etc/modprobe.conf.backup.kvm - edit /etc/modprobe.conf and remove scsi_hostadapter and eth0 lines - add these lines: alias eth0 xennet alias scsi_hostadapter xenblk Those changes will make mkinitrd include the correct drivers to initrd image. Now let's continue in the guest: - backup /etc/fstab: cp -a /etc/fstab /etc/fstab.backup.kvm - edit /etc/fstab - rename /dev/sd* to /dev/xvd* (sda1 becomes xvda1) Xen paravirtual guest disks will be called /dev/xvd* Now, install kernel-xen: yum install kernel-xen After installation check /boot/grub/grub.conf and verify that kernel-xen is the default entry. Also verify the root path kernel parameter is correct. Also check the initrd filename for kernel-xen, since we'll re-create the initrd image. Then create a backup of the kernel-xen initrd image: cp -a /boot/initrd-2.6.18-version.img /boot/initrd-2.6.18-version-backup.img Then re-create the kernel-xen initrd image, so we can verify it looks correct for a Xen guest: mkinitrd -v -f /boot/initrd-2.6.18-version.img 2.6.18-version >From the mkinitrd output verify that it includes xenblk and xennet drivers (as specified in /etc/modprobe.conf). After this shutdown the KVM guest, copy the disk image to Xen host, create a Xen configuration file for the guest, and make it use pygrub bootloader to load grub settings, kernel and initrd from the guest disk. and try starting it.. (if it still fails, I recommend unpacking the initrd image [1], and reading the init script to see where it goes wrong). Good luck :) -- Pasi [1] mkdir /tmp/foo && cd /tmp/foo && zcat /boot/initrd-foo.img | cpio -i -d >On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Pasi Kärkkäinen <[1]pa...@iki.fi> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 11:49:41AM -0800, Christopher Hunt wrote: > >First let me say that I'm not a sysadmin, but am simply wearing > that hat > >this week so please excuse my ignorance. I need to temporarily > move some > >virtual servers from a CentOS-KVM platform to a CentOS-XEN platform > while > >I do some upgrades to the CentOS box. I've created a local LV, and > used > >DD and SCP to transfer the block device from the VKM machine to the > XEN > >machine. For quite a while I struggled with the "Error: (2, > 'Invalid > >kernel', 'xc_dom_parse_elf_kernel: ELF image has no shstrtab\n')" > error > >but thanks to Nick Couchman from > > > > [1][2]http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-users/2008-03/msg00603.html, > >I've passed that. Now I'm stuck with a kernel panic situation. > >Unfortunately the kernel panic error doesn't appear using "xm > console" and > >flashes so quickly through "virt-viewer" that I can't get any > details. > > > > Stop the guest and edit /etc/xen/ cfgfile. > > Remove (or comment out) the vfb line, and then restart the guest. > > Now you get the full console output to "xm console". > -- Pasi > > ___ > CentOS-virt mailing list > [3]centos-v...@centos.org > [4]http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt > > References > >Visible links >1. mailto:pa...@iki.fi >2. http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-users/2008-03/msg00603.html >3. mailto:CentOS-virt@centos.org >
Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6
On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 04:45:56PM +0100, Hildebrand, Nils, 232 wrote: > Hi, > > my local RH-salesman told me that rh6 will be based on a mix of Fedora 11/12 > - so I hope for the best. > Yeah, RHEL6 will be based on Fedora 12 (afaik). Also, I think RHEL6 will support running as Xen guest (PV domU), but I don't think they're going to ship dom0 with it.. I really hope they would, but I'm not holding my breath considering how much they talk about KVM.. > At the moment I am stuck with SLES (currently 10) on our Dom0-servers, since > it has the newer XEN-version. > I would love to move to RH or CentOS with my Dom0s... > Upgrade to SLES11 at least then.. I think it has Xen 3.4.1 available and 2.6.27 dom0 kernel. -- Pasi > > Kind regards > > Nils > > > > -Original Message- > > From: centos-virt-boun...@centos.org > > [mailto:centos-virt-boun...@centos.org] On Behalf Of Pasi Kärkkäinen > > Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 3:58 PM > > To: Discussion about the virtualization on CentOS > > Subject: Re: [CentOS-virt] High CPU usage when running > > aCentOSguestinVirtualBox > > > > On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 12:47:08PM +0100, Hildebrand, Nils, 232 wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > this weekend I took a closer look at KVM. I think that the > > paravirtualized XEN or Hyper-V-Approach is superior to the > > full virtualization. > > > > PV has it's advantages.. > > > > > Red Hat 6 will have XEN-Support (propably XEN 3.4 with > > power-consumption savings). > > > > > > > What did you hear this? Is it a fact? > > > > -- Pasi > > > > > > ___ > > 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 ___ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
