[Oneiric-Topic] Revisit Xen support

[Michael Zoet]

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

Am 02.04.2011 17:03, schrieb Clint Byrum:

...

>> 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...)
>>
>
> I feel like a broken record, but could you provide us with some facts
> to back up these claims? Bug reports, manual pages, etc.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libvirt/+bug/741706

I am into further investigations here. But the two servers are already
in production use, so it is hard to test and get deeper into it. For
now I help myself with all kinds of proxying. But for real virtualized
gateways / routers there is no good solution for me now with KVM.

>
>
> I feel like there is a lot of anecdotal evidence, but we shouldn't make
> our decisions just because somebody says KVM can't do this or Xen can
> do that.
>

That's right but Unix/Linux SysAdmins need options to choose from! If
Xen integration is easily done then Ubuntu Server should provide these
option. If not SysAdmins are forced to use other distros like SLES or
CentOS. That's the trueth in many datacenters.

By the way: KVM has lot of advatages, too. As always you have to
choose which one fits best ;-).

Michael




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

iEYEARECAAYFAk2XQ9kACgkQBvfZ5167qr8E1gCfewctSDhA3iapO3RBpFaHcokl
2zgAoKaJIVEEa3p4DTj52hDGxQBg2PBd
=0RVX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----