FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-30-2012, 12:05 PM
Tom H
 
Default Xen vs KVM

On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 5:54 AM, Jon Dowland <jmtd@debian.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 05:27:14PM +0800, Teo En Ming (Zhang Enming) wrote:
>>
>> Do you know when RHEL 7 might be released?
>
> Take a look at when RHEL 6 came out (very recently) and how long the gap
> between RHEL releases is on average (large) and extrapolate (not for years).

RHEL5 was published more or less at the same time as Fedora 7 and was
based on F6.

RHEL6 was published more or less at the same time as F14 and was based on F13.

Feel free to extrapolate...


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: CAOdo=Sz39PUNgUtzDBNrs7Ox5k-F=JiAoB10713GgRgkkoprfg@mail.gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/CAOdo=Sz39PUNgUtzDBNrs7Ox5k-F=JiAoB10713GgRgkkoprfg@mail.gmail.com
 
Old 03-30-2012, 12:26 PM
Tom H
 
Default Xen vs KVM

On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Hilco Wijbenga
<hilco.wijbenga@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 29 March 2012 22:59, Tom H <tomh0665@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 12:32 PM, francis picabia <fpicabia@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Xen requires a patched kernel. *It is unstable. *It crashed on
>>> me randomly before I got as far as configuring any VM stuff.
>>> The system which experienced this returned to a standard
>>> Debian kernel and never had a problem again.
>>>
>>> KVM is native part of kernel. *It is stable. *I've been running on several
>>> systems for over a year and no crash.
>>>
>>> Both share the same qemu devices and drivers land.
>>>
>>> You can read what IBM has to say about key benefits and security
>>> features of kvm...
>>>
>>> ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/linux/pdfs/LXW03004-USEN-00.pdf
>>>
>>> A big clue is Redhat is dropping xen virtualization going forward.
>>>
>>> Kvm will get more development support than xen.
>>>
>>> I see no reason to even consider xen.
>>
>> It's something of a stretch to go from "it's unstable for me" to "it's
>> unstable for all"... Since RHEL6 was published in November 2010, the
>> level of kvm use might have reached or surpassed the level of xen use
>> by now but xen's still in heavy use by many...
>>
>> Unless there's a fedora-devel thread where this was discussed, there's
>> probably no way to know why RHEL6 switched to kvm except to assume
>> that kvm's in-kernel and xen isn't. This has changed in the latest
>> kernels so xen support might very well be re-added, and possibly
>> favored, in RHEL7.
>
> RH employs some of the KVM devs. RH apparently has not contributed to
> Xen for several years and has now decided to only support a single
> code base: KVM. It does not appear to have anything to do with Xen or
> its quality/performance/features.

Thanks for the info.

We'll see if they stick to that decision. Fedora added Xen QA tests
this release cycle (I don't know whether these tests include dom0).


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: CAOdo=Sx1BMEDVvwDQBeHMSULtK_eJ8TMRJL4yii=jburcSWkJ w@mail.gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/CAOdo=Sx1BMEDVvwDQBeHMSULtK_eJ8TMRJL4yii=jburcSWkJ w@mail.gmail.com
 
Old 03-30-2012, 12:42 PM
Jon Dowland
 
Default Xen vs KVM

On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 02:36:32PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
> I just got interested about virtualization and noticed that this
> thread is still going on.
>
> As far as I can see, most people are currently recommending Xen.

The sample size of thread participants is too small to extrapolate
anything meaningful here :-)

> Are there any GUIs or WebUIs for Xen or KVM and how do they work?

Proxmox VE, Ganeti are just two that have been mentioned already in
this thread.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120330124259.GJ3706@debian">http://lists.debian.org/20120330124259.GJ3706@debian
 
Old 03-30-2012, 01:03 PM
Mika Suomalainen
 
Default Xen vs KVM

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Proxmox VE seems to be it's own distribution and I don't understand
which should be run first with Ganeti .

On 30.03.2012 15:42, Jon Dowland wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 02:36:32PM +0300, Mika Suomalainen wrote:
>> I just got interested about virtualization and noticed that this
>> thread is still going on.
>>
>> As far as I can see, most people are currently recommending Xen.
>
> The sample size of thread participants is too small to extrapolate
> anything meaningful here :-)
>
>> Are there any GUIs or WebUIs for Xen or KVM and how do they
>> work?
>
> Proxmox VE, Ganeti are just two that have been mentioned already
> in this thread.
>
>

- --
Mika Suomalainen
> gpg --keyserver pool.sks-keyservers.net --recv-keys
> 4DB53CFE82A46728 Key fingerprint = 24BC 1573 B8EE D666 D10A AA65
> 4DB5 3CFE 82A4 6728
>> NOTE: The old key (62FE66853913CB03) expires on 03.04.2012!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJPda8rAAoJEE21PP6CpGcoKYIP/2/D5jgIwpB3gahv5jTh4PKP
T6UHSVsgGjvJE6CbMO3AHnY5MMcsSOLPKhAqHig0ToEVscL7UR BINPVoR1Rhieaa
+RDTxsmrBWUvHHiNIK+kyRZ/t7saEyFnPtOKuh2zAvuY+n8wxk0fpYpSbmvYagCr
DLaXq+cc5/oMkP3DUNpMU3UNpB73gj1OS4Z11XVm1Q3bW+tu2eLMPHAP8CT1 Ojz0
RRSCw/ubVPvJGcCzaPYOAD/Py4O6cL0SR2PLWme3MX/yGh8f/7L0I5EuAqqvEn8O
0OxD2w0iSDQsPMoe5eTBbq49XsUtkUd9gjpYyXY7dyKioWfgya WUR6k/RFQqZuLp
3Fof8sJQfr7ugV20dHS+FxasHQe6RN6/5YLdNi1D25uSNEJBBWi6YF3f65tzWRum
tVweOfil4+VpaQD0BfClA3w3S5j2JV+iBVnqfTuNedNObxhU8Q 0z+WFc21h06NBA
SjQmC1lBbaPpRAcd3XatXNpC2adl1QNV0BpLqse1BqWeYgNFn9 Qyz5esWtjK0sN8
fcvjTOVr0L0f69HPd2B+Hp5zuIrrWSE8xP3iN7HVMzILReIjYt 1MYXSv8Of94l7x
M5weFn1zSvrdQmU3jw6xqGRzIr3D/KExIjYV5FrBfOGnyBFHEmeZyP2DIWdwcYei
A4LddWJI7FtfSSlWiZ3I
=kBKv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4F75AF2E.5050601@hotmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/4F75AF2E.5050601@hotmail.com
 
Old 03-30-2012, 02:20 PM
Arnt Karlsen
 
Default Xen vs KVM

On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 00:13:40 -0700, Hilco wrote in message
<CAE1pOi2xCrw=GR+tGymkojW6a9woNSESaQE74yve14UmTO5X aA@mail.gmail.com>:

> RH employs some of the KVM devs. RH apparently has not contributed to
> Xen for several years and has now decided to only support a single
> code base: KVM. It does not appear to have anything to do with Xen or
> its quality/performance/features.

..doing this, they help prevent bit rot in xen et al by providing
a viable competitor to benchmark against and preferably beat. ;o)

--
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
Scenarios always come in sets of three:
best case, worst case, and just in case.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120330162020.2a553df4@nb6.lan">http://lists.debian.org/20120330162020.2a553df4@nb6.lan
 
Old 03-30-2012, 02:51 PM
Martin Steigerwald
 
Default Xen vs KVM

Am Donnerstag, 29. März 2012 schrieb francis picabia:
> Xen requires a patched kernel. It is unstable. It crashed on
> me randomly before I got as far as configuring any VM stuff.
> The system which experienced this returned to a standard
> Debian kernel and never had a problem again.

Not any longer as far as I know. AFAIR at least with 3.2 there is
everything necessary upstream.

--
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 201203301651.40874.Martin@lichtvoll.de">http://lists.debian.org/201203301651.40874.Martin@lichtvoll.de
 
Old 03-30-2012, 05:09 PM
Tony van der Hoff
 
Default Xen vs KVM

On 30/03/12 12:54, Jon Dowland wrote:

On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 01:27:34PM +0800, Teo En Ming (Zhang Enming) wrote:

I beg to differ. Xen virtualization offers superior performance.


I say one thing, you say another. Neither of us are providing any evidence
to the discussion (thus far) apart from my anecdotal evidence, where I get
more than 100 KVM-powered VMs onto one of my hosts, and I couldn't get more
than ~20 Xen-powered VMs onto a similarly-specced host, a year or so prior.
The limitation was tool-based, I think, that is bugs in Xen's management
tools. This isn't really sufficient to further the discussion.


Oracle VirtualBox and Virtual Iron and also Microsoft's Hyper-V is
based on Xen code I think.


This has no bearing on the relative performance merits of Xen vs. KVM.

(FWIW, I think you're wrong re VirtualBox, but Oracle do develop a branded
product based on Xen called Oracle VM, formerly Sun xVM. I'm fairly sure
that Hyper-V was developed independently from Xen, but it certainly supports
some kind-of interoperation with Xen interfaces for guests.)


For heaven's sake, it is perfectly evident that this guy (Zhang Enming)
is setting up as a troll. Admittedly, he's doing it quite well, but
let's stop responding to his ranting, and he'll get bored.


Just IMHO!

--
Tony van der Hoff | mailto:tony@vanderhoff.org
Ariège, France |


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: 4F75E8D8.20505@vanderhoff.org">http://lists.debian.org/4F75E8D8.20505@vanderhoff.org
 
Old 03-30-2012, 05:50 PM
Patrick Bartek
 
Default Xen vs KVM

> Do you know when RHEL 7 might be released?

If you had asked that a couple of months ago, I would have said late 2013 since, in the past, a new release came just before support ended on the version two versions prior to it. *In this case, RHEL 5, whose support ends in early 2014. *But Red Hat has just extended support on 5 and 6, and I assume, all future releases, from 7 to 10 years. *So all bets are off.

Best guess now by the "experts" is for 7 to be released sometime between 2014 and 2016. *My guess is earlier rather than later depending on demand and new technology.

B


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 1333129814.35591.YahooMailNeo@web160304.mail.bf1.y ahoo.com">http://lists.debian.org/1333129814.35591.YahooMailNeo@web160304.mail.bf1.y ahoo.com
 
Old 03-30-2012, 09:57 PM
Lisi
 
Default Xen vs KVM

On Friday 30 March 2012 18:09:44 Tony van der Hoff wrote:
> For heaven's sake, it is perfectly evident that this guy (Zhang Enming)
> is setting up as a troll. Admittedly, he's doing it quite well, but
> let's stop responding to his ranting, and he'll get bored.

I came to that same conclusion, but it is I who have got bored. He seems to
have the hide of a rhinocerus and the stamina of a camel!

Lisi


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 201203302257.52381.lisi.reisz@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/201203302257.52381.lisi.reisz@gmail.com
 
Old 08-21-2012, 03:23 PM
francis picabia
 
Default Xen vs KVM

On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 2:59 AM, Tom H <tomh0665@gmail.com> wrote:

> Unless there's a fedora-devel thread where this was discussed, there's
> probably no way to know why RHEL6 switched to kvm except to assume
> that kvm's in-kernel and xen isn't. This has changed in the latest
> kernels so xen support might very well be re-added, and possibly
> favored, in RHEL7.
>

This is uninformed. I don't know why you bother to write it.

Please visit the Redhat web site and search for information on virtualization.

Here is one of the many news items one can google showing Redhat
has dropped Xen in favour of KVM. KVM is the cornerstone of Redhat's
attempt to compete with VMware solution. Xen support in Redhat
is set to expire in 2014.

http://www.infoworld.com/d/virtualization/red-hat-drops-xen-in-favor-kvm-in-rhel-6-498

Here is the 2008 announcement regarding Redhat's purchase of Qumaranet, which
may answer some questions about xen and kvm in Redhat's future (now
the present).

http://www.redhat.com/promo/qumranet/


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: CA+AKB6GOUJtbDMMZBaEeZc-fyqK_-6cNu4S6fo-PeH74O+BJwg@mail.gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/CA+AKB6GOUJtbDMMZBaEeZc-fyqK_-6cNu4S6fo-PeH74O+BJwg@mail.gmail.com
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 01:29 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org