WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-users

Re: [Xen-users] adios to XEN

To: chris <tknchris@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] adios to XEN
From: Grant McWilliams <grantmasterflash@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 08:11:49 -0700
Cc: John Haxby <john.haxby@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Bart Coninckx <bart.coninckx@xxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Mon, 24 May 2010 08:14:03 -0700
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=A9PS6DzGJL5wl8ZaV9YjxzJHrayMTjX0lBTVQmpqIp8=; b=dcTE5N74gZt1Ood1h4dN5uyXJClwcc68kDJx8k6bwdEPas++dsuaVPI9BZi3mfDoU9 gYqsZpW6dILDCa0liNUPvBTM8+WbrnJoqtU9f7/9wVAL6L0jCMqgZtlmGy2I0ODkPM+5 5+4nxCox1SOsIdqT/jnUnSWT/j3A8uP+81qvg=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=Khr8Qftc/s0+5D8p52XuqDS5WIhL/iAeACajLrc+83Y/akDaitSs7lYFUA0wDlryiQ d1Ha0taNyDCEsrU++REg3pluIuwxjKEqjdqmuvI3/csKxViohBcntUoc/vBtpb6+FPnQ qTFHGy4uqsgHWQLqY40ZFDAoXfPpYKOxTYopU=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <AANLkTimY-T_6uKg9Y0Kba6s5lzV-END-OR4QpETHeDkR@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-users@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <AANLkTilw5HQMpwFmPZNH4kKU7q5bm8J65hP2gw3byy3J@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <AANLkTileNvs7SISDfrRfFzAuI_9wtWKZrSoCnfcJzOvz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4BFA571D.3030106@xxxxxxxxxx> <201005241246.07036.bart.coninckx@xxxxxxxxxx> <AANLkTimY-T_6uKg9Y0Kba6s5lzV-END-OR4QpETHeDkR@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 4:53 AM, chris <tknchris@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Is this an april fools joke? Where would anyone get that crazy idea? :)

- chris


This is actually a common misconception that I run into a lot. If you think about other situations
though it sort of makes sense - something in hardware is usually faster than the same thing in software. Think 3D acceleration.
However, in virtualization it's very much the opposite. A paravirtualized OS is aware that it's being
virtualized making it much better at handling being virtualized. A full virtualized OS relies on hardware
being smart enough to catch requests from the Virtual Machine and direct them to a different location.
The virtual OS has no knowledge of being virtualized thus is not helping in any way.

In some aspects full virt is catching up to paravirt but it seems that Xen when it moves to hybrid virtualization
will use full virt in those cases where it may be faster and paravirt everywhere else.


KVM without paravirtualized drivers has exactly the same problems as Xen without paravirtualized drivers.


Grant McWilliams
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>