[opensuse-virtual] a 'marketing' question ...
i'll be the 1st to admit I don't always see eye-to-eye with the Suse, Opensuse & Virtualization efforts' actions, directions, etc. but in the end, it's, imo, the only solid distro-supported Xen/Virtualization solution out there. modern kernel, Xen4, PCI/USB/etc-Passthrough, etc are all there (I won't start re: PV_Grub), and, although docs can be at times ... challenging ... it works. In production. Under heavy load. As do others, I follow progress in Xen channels/mailing lists/etc. I find *many* HowTo questions that arise there would be readily handled by simply using current (or OBS repos') *Suse/Xen. That said, there seems to be a tangible ... lack of interest in, if not disdain for ... Suse+Xen. Yet the flailings about of how to get things done in Centos, Debian, etc ... continue. That's certainly fine. I'm curious: (1) Why does this tension exist? Or, in your opinion(s), does it? (2) What can be done differently in *Suse to further adoption for Virtualization? The latter question, in particular, is a purely mercenary concern for me -- the bigger/stronger the community of users, the better off my deployments are/will be. Not trolling, just interested. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-virtual+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-virtual+help@opensuse.org
-----Original Message----- From: 0bo0 [mailto:0.bugs.only.0@gmail.com] Sent: lundi 28 juin 2010 23:02 To: opensuse-virtual@opensuse.org Subject: [opensuse-virtual] a 'marketing' question ... i'll be the 1st to admit I don't always see eye-to-eye with the Suse, Opensuse & Virtualization efforts' actions, directions, etc. but in the end, it's, imo, the only solid distro-supported Xen/Virtualization solution out there. modern kernel, Xen4, PCI/USB/etc-Passthrough, etc are all there (I won't start re: PV_Grub), and, although docs can be at times ... challenging ... it works. In production. Under heavy load. As do others, I follow progress in Xen channels/mailing lists/etc. I find *many* HowTo questions that arise there would be readily handled by simply using current (or OBS repos') *Suse/Xen. That said, there seems to be a tangible ... lack of interest in, if not disdain for ... Suse+Xen. Yet the flailings about of how to get things done in Centos, Debian, etc ... continue. That's certainly fine. I'm curious: (1) Why does this tension exist? Or, in your opinion(s), does it? (2) What can be done differently in *Suse to further adoption for Virtualization? The latter question, in particular, is a purely mercenary concern for me -- the bigger/stronger the community of users, the better off my deployments are/will be. Not trolling, just interested. -- OK, here is a project that I want to show here next week : http://2010.rmll.info/IMG/png/JyGo_en.png Open cloud on openSUSE. I tried the recipes but to no avail :-( I asked for help and hopefully something might work out. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-virtual+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-virtual+help@opensuse.org
Well, quite interesting. Actually besides SUSE, I think Debian is the only distro packaging Xen Dom0 kernels nowadays. (Mandriva has older Xen Dom0 kernels, not sure about Ubuntu) ofc. Red Hat supports Xen fully in RHEL 5, but this won't be in RHEL 6, where Red Hat migrates to KVM. as for OSS Virtualization in general - both KVM and VirtualBox do a wonderful job for a lot of people. Xen's main advantage over others is Linux-over-Linux in PV mode... for which OpenVZ can be used just as well... If I were to create an OSS virtualization solution, I would go for OpenVZ for Linux-on-Linux approach, and VirtualBox for all the rest needs. -- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov" -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-virtual+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-virtual+help@opensuse.org
My question is. Microsoft supports these KVM, VirtualBox for their windows servers? IMHO, I believe this would be a good point, especially because today, we have no more only windows, neither only Linux, in 99% all datacenter are heteregeneos plataform. If Microsoft not endorses KVM, Virtual Iron, VirtualBox.... our way to achieve any related mission on virtualization will be quite harder, because most guys use virtualization to play Windows too.
Alexey Eremenko <al4321@gmail.com> 28 Junho, 2010 >>> Well, quite interesting
Actually besides SUSE, I think Debian is the only distro packaging Xen Dom0 kernels nowadays. (Mandriva has older Xen Dom0 kernels, not sure about Ubuntu) ofc. Red Hat supports Xen fully in RHEL 5, but this won't be in RHEL 6, where Red Hat migrates to KVM. as for OSS Virtualization in general - both KVM and VirtualBox do a wonderful job for a lot of people. Xen's main advantage over others is Linux-over-Linux in PV mode... for which OpenVZ can be used just as well... If I were to create an OSS virtualization solution, I would go for OpenVZ for Linux-on-Linux approach, and VirtualBox for all the rest needs. -- -Alexey Eromenko "Technologov" -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-virtual+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-virtual+help@opensuse.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-virtual+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-virtual+help@opensuse.org
Carlos Ribeiro wrote:
My question is. Microsoft supports these KVM, VirtualBox for their windows servers?
IMHO, I believe this would be a good point, especially because today, we have no more only windows, neither only Linux, in 99% all datacenter are heteregeneos plataform. If Microsoft not endorses KVM,
AFAIK, work is being done to get Windows SVVP certified on KVM. Surely RHEL6 will have SVVP cerfication for important Windows versions. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-virtual+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-virtual+help@opensuse.org
On Monday 28 June 2010, 0bo0 wrote:
I'm curious:
(1) Why does this tension exist? Or, in your opinion(s), does it?
I can't see any tension, at least from the traffic on this list.
(2) What can be done differently in *Suse to further adoption for Virtualization?
100% focus on KVM is the only way. XEN is not linux and whatever technical advantage it may have had is gone. Paul -- Paul Reeves -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-virtual+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-virtual+help@opensuse.org
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Alexey Eremenko <al4321@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually besides SUSE, I think Debian is the only distro packaging Xen Dom0 kernels nowadays. (Mandriva has older Xen Dom0 kernels, not sure about Ubuntu)
I _think_ Gentoo & Arch do as well ... as to level of capabiility/stability/support, that's a different issue.
ofc. Red Hat supports Xen fully in RHEL 5,
Sure. RedHat 'supports' it as long as (a) you don't don't touch it, &/or expect it to do anything more modern than its last release ....
but this won't be in RHEL 6, where Red Hat migrates to KVM.
Seems it's (semi)official: http://www.infoworld.com/d/virtualization/red-hat-drops-xen-in-favor-kvm-in-...
as for OSS Virtualization in general - both KVM and VirtualBox do a wonderful job for a lot of people.
Of course. And there's a lot of things they don't do that Xen does. On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Paul Reeves <paul@fleetriver.com> wrote:
Xen is not Linux
If you're saying that Xen is not a kernel-module, or a linux-only solution, you're correct. If you're suggesting that support for it is not being integrated into the kernel, you're not. Beyond that, I'm not at all sure what the value of it "is" or "is not" Linux ... is.
whatever technical advantage it may have had is gone.
Unfortunately, the facts simply don't bear that out ... If/when KVM is a full enterprise-capable replacement for all of Xen's functionality/capability, flexibility, of course, that's a different story ... RH6 doesn't even have a planned release date, afaict -- at least, RH isn't telling us as a customer. An interesting read: http://blog.xen.org/index.php/2010/05/07/xen-%E2%80%93-kvm-linux-%E2%80%93-a... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-virtual+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-virtual+help@opensuse.org
On Tuesday 29 June 2010, 0bo0 wrote:
Beyond that, I'm not at all sure what the value of it "is" or "is not" Linux ... is.
Because Xen is its own kernel that then loads an instance of Linux as its primary O/S it menas that a system that was working correctly with a non-Xen kernel may fail if proprietary graphics drivers are installed. Sure, you don't need that stuff on a production box, but on my dev box I like to do more than just play with virtualization. I found that XEN + nvidia | radeon didn't work. I also recall probs with vnc to a remote XEN box. OTOH, kvm fits snugly into the whole stack. Nothing needs to be changed. If the setup was working before the KVM module was loaded it will continue to work afterwards.
whatever technical advantage it may have had is gone.
Unfortunately, the facts simply don't bear that out ...
That depends - which facts? When I first looked at this seriously a year ago I found facts then that related to early implementations of KVM. Sure, XEN was better/faster/whatever. Since then, KVM has matured and virtio drivers have appeared. Performance wise I am yet to see any problems. It is good enough for me. Paul -- Paul Reeves -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-virtual+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-virtual+help@opensuse.org
participants (6)
-
0bo0 -
Alexey Eremenko -
Carlos Ribeiro -
Jim Fehlig -
Jimmy Pierre -
Paul Reeves