Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Matt Ayres <[email protected]> writes:
I think the Xen guys would disagree with you on this. Xen claims <3% overhead
on the XenSource site.
Where did you get these figures from? What Xen version did you test? What was
your configuration? Did you have kernel debugging enabled? You can't just post
numbers without the data to back it up, especially when it conflicts greatly
with the Xen developers statements. AFAIK Xen is well on it's way to inclusion
into the mainstream kernel.
It doesn't matter. The proof that Xen has more overhead is trivial
Xen does more, and Xen clients don't share resources well.
I understand the difference. It was more about Kirill grabbing numbers
out of the air. I actually think the containers and Xen complement each
other very well. As Xen is now based on 2.6.16 (as are both VServer and
OVZ) it makes sense to run a few Xen domains that then in turn run
containers in some scenarios. As far as the last part, Xen doesn't
share resources at all :)
Thank you,
Matt Ayres
-
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]
