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

Re: [Xen-users] a new server for Xen

  • To: xin <xcheney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Jan Albrecht <jan.albrecht@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2007 06:15:32 +0100
  • Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Delivery-date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 21:14:49 -0800
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=dLhYVZrbboVtmg/r6JxikeUhbEIX9+qKg683Q7beyiWEqKddFAWwHnTU50Y5btjdRwMBFaOjBb7L0JZpnq9LgSRfz9HUnyc38J3aIBw627hCwpTWcZnazzx+euznjQ30KD3V/HsLxivQW4M6Zw6opx/52zulHlxvD8No2DPYKow=
  • List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>

xin wrote:
> Thanks for that. What about a VT-supported cpu to do the para-virtualization
> instead of full-virtualization? which one is better.
I've AMD PV and Intel VT here and from my point of view the VT are much
better (and that's no matter if they're AMD, Intel or from Mars...),
because you can install an OS "out-of-box" to that server.
With PV you're limited to Linux and to special kernels.  And the
arguments Mats brought up may be right, but as long as you do normal
daily business on such a server (file-server, webserver, etc...) at VT
machine would always be the better choice.


Xen-users mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.