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?