Oh, after you come to an agreement and start posting patches, can you
also outline why we want this in the kernel (what it does that low
level virtualization doesn't, etc, etc), and how and why you've agreed
to implement it. Basically, some background and a summary of your
discussions for those who can't follow everything. Or is that a faq
item?
Nick, will be glad to shed some light on it.
First of all, what it does which low level virtualization can't:
- it allows to run 100 containers on 1GB RAM
(it is called containers, VE - Virtual Environments,
VPS - Virtual Private Servers).
- it has no much overhead (<1-2%), which is unavoidable with hardware
virtualization. For example, Xen has >20% overhead on disk I/O.
- it allows to create/deploy VE in less than a minute, VE start/stop
takes ~1-2 seconds.
- it allows to dynamically change all resource limits/configurations.
In OpenVZ it is even possible to add/remove virtual CPUs to/from VE.
It is possible to increase/descrease memory limits on the fly etc.
- it has much more efficient memory usage with single template file
in a cache if COW-like filesystem is used for VE templates.
- it allows you to access VE files from host easily if needed.
This helps to make management much more flexible, e.g. you can
upgrade/repair/fix all you VEs from host, i.e. easy mass management.
OS kernel virtualization
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
OS virtualization is a kernel solution, which replaces the usage
of many global variables with context-dependant counterparts. This
allows to have isolated private resources in different contexts.
So VE means essentially context and a set of it's variables/settings,
which include but not limited to, own process tree, files, IPC
resources, IP routing, network devices and such.
Full virtualization solution consists of:
- virtualization of resources, i.e. private contexts
- resource controls, for limiting contexts
- management tools
Such kind of virtualization solution is implemented in OpenVZ
(http://openvz.org) and Linux-Vserver (http://linux-vserver.org) projects.
Summary of previous discussions on LKML
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
- we agreed upon doing virtualization of each kernel subsystem
separately, not as a single virtual environment.
- we almost agreed upon calling virtualization of subsystems
"namespaces".
- we were discussing whether we should have global namespace context,
like 'current' or bypass context as an argument to all functions
which require it.
- we didn't agreed on whether we need a config option and ability to
compile kernel w/o virtual namespaces.
Thansk,
Kirill
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]