Re: [Xen-users] Re: preferred XEN dom0 OS

["Fajar A. Nugraha" <list@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 5:11 PM, Rudi Ahlers <Rudi@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Fajar A. Nugraha <list@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 4:42 PM, Rudi Ahlers <Rudi@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Grant McWilliams
>>> <grantmasterflash@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Why not just install a newer version of Xen?
>>
>>>
>>> cause I prefer stability over cutting edge, and previous experiences
>>> with using XEN that's not native to the OS has given us all kinds of
>>> horendous results. We use XEN in production so I can't really afford
>>> to try new things every now and then, and then sit with problems when
>>> an upgrade didn't go as expected.
>>
>> Actually, for that requirement you should either:
>> - stick with Centos, or
>> - go with XenServer
>>
>> Since you "prefer stability over cutting edge", I don't think any
>> newer dom0-kernel version (including the one already upstream in linux
>> kernel) will be suitable. There will be missing features (e.g. vga
>> console, blktap) and bugs. They're continually being fixed (see
>> xen-devel list archive), but I wouldn't recommend either git version
>> or current upstream kernel for production.
>>
>> It might be a different story if all xen-related features are already
>> accepted upstream (either in kernel, or in userspace qemu). But again,
>> if your concern is stability, I'd recommend to just stick with Centos,
>> or go with XenServer (even XCP might be too bleeding-edge for your
>> needs). RHEL5 is still being supported until 2014 (or 2017 if you have
>> extended life cycle support), so Centos should follow as well.
>>
>> --
>> Fajar
>>
>
> mmm, ok.
>
> What is the current native XEN version on Debian or OpenSuse? I
> couldn't find anything definate. Some sources suggest 4.0, others 4.1
> - how stable is XEN 4.x at this stage?

Ah, the million-dollar question :)

I'd like to know the answer to that as well. Is there ANY linux distro which:
- comes bundled with Xen 4.x
- comes with supported dom0 kernel (i.e. not third-party like ppa)
which supports blktap (including tap:vhd)
- supports memory resize using "xm mem-set"
- supports CPU hotplug using "xm vcpu-set" without having to do
additional settings (e.g. without having to do echo 1 >
/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu2/online)
- has no cirtical xen-related bug within the last 3 months

I haven't found it, which is why I say stick with RHEL/Centos if you
want "stable"

>
> And what about Slackware / Gentoo or other similar Linux distro's?
>
>
>
> My problem with CentOS is that CentOS 6 (rather RH6) doesn't have
> native XEN anymore so our upgrade path looks a bit uncertain right
> now.
>
>
> Isn't XenServer built on CentOS as well?
> What *real* benefit will I have in using XENServer instead of CentOS + XEN?
>

Mainly support. And the fact that it comes as a bundle which should
"just work" when installed on bare metal.

There are other differences as well (e.g. the userland program is
different, "xe" instead of "xm")

> We use CloudMin to manage the XEN nodes, so I don't really care too
> much about "easy management" if that's the only real difference. So,
> if someone has used both these, for anything other trying to see how
> it works, please share some experiences if you don't mind

I don't think webmin/cloudmin will work on XenServer/XCP

-- 
Fajar

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