Re: [Xen-users] Xen vs VirtualBox

["Javier Guerra" <javier@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 12:49 PM, Grant McWilliams
<grantmasterflash@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Can people start "replying to all" instead of sending me personal messages?
> It's much more productive for the list.

(OT note: gmail has recently added the 'reply to all by default'
option!  and there was great rejoicing in the land)

> which may have an edge. In certain areas KVM is getting there like network
> and disk access using the PV drivers. But again nobody's going to use beta
> PV drivers in a production environmnet. KVM needs to bake longer. Xen and
> ESX have both been out there longer and are very stable.

the PV drivers are very good, and stable.  where there's much work to
be done is in the QEMU side of virtio.

> I would like to see QEMU moved to being a central repostitory though because
> all of them (Xen, KVM, and VirtualBox) rely heavily on QEMU and make
> modifications but the QEMU in each is not the same version. They contribute
> upstream but it seems to take forever for something from VBox to get to KVM
> or KVM to Xen. KVM IS QEMU with an accelerator according to the QEMU people.

last week there was a big bunch of patches from KVM upstream to QEMU,
getting closer to the goal of making KVM just the kernel module, and
QEMU would just use it, like it uses kqemu.

> The KVM guys don't like thinking of it that way though and I think VBox
> relies heavily on QEMU although VBox is much more powerful. Xen only uses it
> in HVM mode. I think the QEMU in Xen is the oldest which explains why KVM is
> faster than Xen  HVM (but can't compete in pure PV mode).

i have to check more about how VBox works.  unfortunately, the webpage
isn't as helpful to understand the architecture details as the Xen's
one.

-- 
Javier

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users