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

[Xen-users] paravirt_ops DomU, does it mean performance?

  • To: "Xen users mailing list" <xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: "Emre Erenoglu" <erenoglu@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:31:01 +0100
  • Delivery-date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 07:31:32 -0800
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=Hg7iYL7daSeuJmtRjM5IWpXnuLFJhqhGizvKFfHuVfDilXmfJ86w4dhc8eh8vj2OMIXnM5OhEhzbtrysc4fbkOkU4mbeFsLTlb5QOJGOswvPnn9fqTiJVmRXW4PdStp9NADRT+oDJh79qyEJpAPQlfiZbLnqLy4G2ZcAHnLguvs=
  • List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>


I was wondering if using a paravirt_ops enabled kernel (say 2.6.23) as a Paravirtual DomU would mean higher performance out of the box, or if we still need to compile some xen specific device drivers for network and block devices.

Similarly, if HVM domains can run at the same performance as PV domains just by using PV drivers for network and block, why are we bothering ourselves with PV?  Why don't we -always- use HVM DomU's with PV drivers?

Thanks for views on this,

Emre Erenoglu
Xen-users mailing list



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