[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: qemu or qemu-kvm for kvm in squeeze

Martin Kraus wrote:
This seems pretty specific to me. I have asked what is the difference between
qemu and qemu-kvm for kvm virtualization. Both support kvm and both are based
on qemu 0.11.1 so I wanted to know what is the difference.

I'm not really sure that virtualbox is the right thing for a server. I'm not
much sure about kvm+qemu either, but xen just keeps crashing so there isn't
much I can do about it.

KVM is a solution, and a good one. Rather than using its own hypervisor software and a special guest to manage the domain, it uses the Linux kernel itself. The latter already provides a hell lot of subsystems relevant to hypervisor technology, which makes KVM really simpler in terms of complexity, thus arguably less prone to problems. Provided you're comfortable with Linux and that you trust its stability, KVM is probably your best solution. If not, then Xen is more independent and has its advantages too; their architectures are just different and inherently offer different things.

More info relative to my last post: if you want to use KVM, you do *need* the modified qemu software provided by the kvm package (which really points to qemu-kvm). These changes are currently pushed upstream [1]. I hope it clears any ambiguity.

I agree about VirtualBox, it clearly targets workstations (and it's good at it).

I can only recommend Tim Jones' articles on IBM's DeveloperWorks site, they provide really good overviews on this subject (and others). Nothing to do with IBM, BTW, I just found they were quality stuff.

[1] http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Main_Page


Reply to: