[Oneiric-Topic] Revisit Xen support

[Michael Zoet]

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

Am 02.04.2011 02:05, schrieb Raphaël Pinson:
> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 1:51 AM, Clint Byrum <clint at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>> Excerpts from Chuck Short's message of Wed Mar 30 07:27:50 -0700 2011:
>>
>> Just playing devil's advocate here.
>>
>> Other than people already having familiarity with Xen, what is a
>> compelling reason to support it in favor of, or in addition to, KVM?
>
>
> Familiarity is a good reason I think, but also industry standards, and
> hardware considerations. I think a lot of big companies expect major
> distributions such as Ubuntu to provide a proper support for such a
> standard as Xen. I know it came as a disappointment for us that using
> Lucid as a (production) Xen dom0 was nearly impossible. Also, afair,
> KVM requires hardware support. Most recent machines provide it, but
> it's not rare to find servers that are too old to use it, and then
> you'd rather use Xen for servers than VMWare...
>

I agree with that! Really big companies choose the things they know.
And if they have to switch the distro they do it.

Another advantage for Xen: it is more mature and easier to setup (at
least for me because I have only one configuration file I can change
with vim). Much more documentation around that works. You have much
more network options. And you can easily assign a hardware NIC to a VM
with Xen. With KVM this does not work on every hardware... (Now I have
2 15.000,- ? servers where I can not do the things with KVM I could
easily do with Xen. This was a pitty experience...)


Michael


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk2W3E8ACgkQBvfZ5167qr84eACfSCUbvBfbvlYQPTOeZ0pqxgJE
QfkAmwQuRa+u544lWrxruLWj8IIOiQX3
=sqYU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----