On 4 April 2011 13:08, Michael Zoet <michael.z...@zoet.de> wrote: > > Maybe we should ask though. Adding Xen back in means less resources for > > KVM, so the KVM users' opinions matter quite a bit. > > In my opinion asking "is some software better than another software" is > the wrong approach. KVM has advantages over Xen and Xen has advantages > over KVM. It depends on a lot of factors which is an appropriate solution > for a given task. Sometimes KVM wins and sometimes Xen and sometimes > VMware and so on. >
Ack. +1 KVM should not degraded in favor of Xen. Never! > At least not in the current state of things. One of the major advatages of KVM is its stimplicity, and the fact it's in streamline Linux. As I understood, as well in Debian as In ubuntu, the problem with Xen was keeping it supported in more recent kernels, and managing the whole thing. What SysAdmins need are options to choose from to fit the best in their > networks. If Xen is available in the vanilla kernel a Xen kernel should be > available. But never in favor of a good KVM support. > When Xen gets vanilla support for Dom0, it definitely could get some renewed attention, and things need to be evaluated again. It is the same for MTAs: we have among postfix exim, sendmail, qmail and a > lot of other MTAs in the package repository. One MTA might work better for > a given situation than the others. -- Met vriendelijke groet, Serge van Ginderachter
-- ubuntu-server mailing list ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam
