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] a new server for Xen

To: "Petersson, Mats" <Mats.Petersson@xxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-users] a new server for Xen
From: "Ryan Burke" <burke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 08:13:40 -0600 (CST)
Cc: Jan Albrecht <jan.albrecht@xxxxxxxxx>, xin <xcheney@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Thu, 01 Mar 2007 06:12:54 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Importance: Normal
In-reply-to: <907625E08839C4409CE5768403633E0B018E19F2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <907625E08839C4409CE5768403633E0B018E19F2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: burke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.8
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
>> Jan Albrecht
>> Sent: 01 March 2007 05:16
>> To: xin
>> Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: [Xen-users] a new server for Xen
>>
>> xin wrote:
>> > Thanks for that. What about a VT-supported cpu to do the
>> para-virtualization
>> > instead of full-virtualization? which one is better.
>> I've AMD PV and Intel VT here and from my point of view the
>> VT are much
>> better (and that's no matter if they're AMD, Intel or from Mars...),
>> because you can install an OS "out-of-box" to that server.
>> With PV you're limited to Linux and to special kernels.  And the
>> arguments Mats brought up may be right, but as long as you do normal
>> daily business on such a server (file-server, webserver, etc...) at VT
>> machine would always be the better choice.
>
> Sure, with VT (in my view obviously preferrably from AMD ;-) ) you have
> ALL the possibilites, rather than just half of them. I should have said
> so in my post.
>
> --
> Mats


I guess now I'm confused. I thought that AMD PV and Intel VT did basically
the same thing. They allowed unmodified OS's to work with a hypervisor to
support full vitrualization. From that Jan said it sounds like there is a
draw back of PV vs VT? I haven't heard anything about that. Can someone
explain (I personally prefer AMD)??

Thanks,
Ryan

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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>