Re: [Pkg-xen-devel] Xen status in lenny?
Lucas Nussbaum <email@example.com> writes:
> On 15/07/08 at 14:01 +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
>> Xen is just one solution to virtualisation. I may agree that a general
>> decision to support virtualisation on Debian could be a policy decision, but
>> whether we'll support one specific technology, for which there are many
>> alternatives, is very much a technical decision. Does it work, can we get it
>> to work and do we have the people to keep it work after release?
> Debian supported Xen in etch. Which of the "many alternatives" should
> Debian recommend to its users currently running a Debian dom0 in
> paravirt mode?
Isn't the policy decision in question here to only have one kernel
source in a release?
> I don't think that any of the alternatives are valid candidates yet:
> - Linux-Vserver, OpenVZ: clearly not the same use case.
> - Virtualbox, qemu: poor performance under some workloads.
Unusable for production work. Emulation is just too slow. The group of
people that can live with that much slow down compared to xen is
> - KVM: is very promising but is it really a valid alternative *now*
> for current Xen users?
KVM needs hardware support and even then its I/O is slower. It also
deadlocks the I/O under I/O load from time to time.
I could live with the I/O slowdown but nothing will make hardware
> This might change in a few months, of course, but in a few months lenny
> will be released. ;-)