[Fedora-xen] Goodbye Xen on RH/Fedora?
Dustin Henning
Dustin.Henning at prd-inc.com
Wed Jan 21 20:55:24 UTC 2009
Wow, maybe the F8 documentation doesn't cover that, or maybe I'm remembering
wrong, but good to know for future testing. Thanks.
-----Original Message-----
From: Avi Kivity [mailto:avi at redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 13:43
To: Dustin.Henning at prd-inc.com
Cc: 'Evan Lavelle'; fedora-xen at redhat.com
Subject: Re: [Fedora-xen] Goodbye Xen on RH/Fedora?
Dustin Henning wrote:
> I tried the Qumranet drivers before I went with Xen. I don't think
> there is necessarily a problem with the Qumranet drivers, in fact, they
> could potentially have better inbound speeds than the GPLPV ones (though
it
> seems unlikely as much as people test and James works on them on the
> xen-users list). The reason the Qumranet drivers don't cut it is because
> they are only network drivers. This means your data access (and possibly
> other stuff GPLPV hits) is still fully virtualized.
Storage drivers are in the works, hopefully out soon.
> Another reason I went
> with Xen is the PHY: option. I use a physical data source, as opposed to
a
> file, for my guests. Each one has its own HD, actually, though partitions
> or RAID arrays would obviously work as well. If I remember correctly,
when
> I tried this (some time ago), KVM had no such option
kvm has had this from day 1; 'qemu /dev/volgroup/logvol' will start a
guest from the specified logical volume. For good performance I
recommend 'qemu -drive file=/dev/volgroup/logvol,cache=off'.
Of course, libvirt will handle all that for you.
--
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.
More information about the Fedora-xen
mailing list