Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6

[Karanbir Singh]

On 11/12/2009 11:43 AM, Kris Buytaert wrote:
> The bigger question however will be if and how this work can come back
> upstream and potentially be used in CentOS ?
>
> What's the idea on that ?

Well, as Pasi already pointed out, the CentOS core-distro will be Red 
Hat source based - but hey, there is a community here, if there is 
interest and people around with $clue > 0; No reason why more could not 
be done along the lines.

el5beta2 will define what problem needs solving, around which edge and 
what the options are.

-- 
Karanbir Singh
London, UK| http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh
ICQ: 2522219  | Yahoo IM: z00dax  | Gtalk: z00dax
GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc
___
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]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:43:48PM +0100, Kris Buytaert wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-11-10 at 16:26 +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> > >
> > 
> > Both Novell and Oracle having been deeply involved in Xen lately, both
> > are developing and supporting their own products based on Xen.
> > 
> 
> 
> Given the fact that Unbreakable is a source rebuild from RHEL,  and
> Oracle is putting a lot of effort behind Xen   , they hosted the Xen
> summit before, after the aquisition of Virtual Iron where they clearly
> defined their roadmap was Xen based,  (not even including potential Xen
> based platforms they might get when the Sun acquisition eventually falls
> trough) 
> 
> 
> 
> So it looks to me that they will have to build a Dom0 based distribution
> anyhow.
> 
> The bigger question however will be if and how this work can come back
> upstream and potentially be used in CentOS ?
> 
> What's the idea on that ?
> 

Well.. CentOS is, and will be, 1:1 rebuild of RHEL.

if Oracle is going to build their own dom0 distro, then it could be the
upstream project.. 

-- Pasi

___
CentOS-virt mailing list
CentOS-virt@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt

Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6

[Kris Buytaert]

On Tue, 2009-11-10 at 16:26 +0200, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> >
> 
> Both Novell and Oracle having been deeply involved in Xen lately, both
> are developing and supporting their own products based on Xen.
> 


Given the fact that Unbreakable is a source rebuild from RHEL,  and
Oracle is putting a lot of effort behind Xen   , they hosted the Xen
summit before, after the aquisition of Virtual Iron where they clearly
defined their roadmap was Xen based,  (not even including potential Xen
based platforms they might get when the Sun acquisition eventually falls
trough) 



So it looks to me that they will have to build a Dom0 based distribution
anyhow.

The bigger question however will be if and how this work can come back
upstream and potentially be used in CentOS ?

What's the idea on that ?

greetigns

Kris



___
CentOS-virt mailing list
CentOS-virt@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt

Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6

[Miguel Di Ciurcio Filho]

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

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

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

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

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

Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6

[Adam]

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] XEN and RH 6

[Scott McClanahan]

> 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 and RH 6

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

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] XEN and RH 6

[Grant McWilliams]

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

Re: [CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6

[Grant McWilliams]

>
>
>
> 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

[Dennis J.]

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

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

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

[Dennis J.]

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

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

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] XEN and RH 6

[Dennis J.]

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

[Ray Van Dolson]

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

[Grant McWilliams]

>
>
>
> 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] XEN and RH 6

[Dennis J.]

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

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

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

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

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

[Ben M.]

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

[Grant McWilliams]

> 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

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

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] XEN and RH 6

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

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

[Grant McWilliams]

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

[carlopmart]

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

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

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

[carlopmart]

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

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

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

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

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] XEN and RH 6

[Frederic SOULIER]

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] XEN and RH 6

[carlopmart]

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] XEN and RH 6

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

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

[carlopmart]

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] XEN and RH 6

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

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

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

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

[carlopmart]

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

[Frederic SOULIER]

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] XEN and RH 6

[Pasi Kärkkäinen]

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

[CentOS-virt] XEN and RH 6

[Hildebrand, Nils, 232]

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.

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...


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