On Fri, 19 May 2006 11:28:08 -0700, "Hua Zhong" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> how many virtualization technologies Linux should support?
> Particularly, does it need to support both OS-level virtualization
If users want it. I do.
> It seems at least the VM approach is much less risky. It might be helpful
> if someone could explain why we need both.
A better question is, why can't we have both?
I don't have unlimited memory and disk. I need to conserve my
resources as much as possible.
The one-kernel approach saves memory, leaving more for applications.
That's important to me. I don't need to run multiple kernels, and I
don't want to. I only want multiple secure operating environments.
The one-kernel approach also makes it easy to have all VPS in one disk
partition, without the performance penalty of file backed I/O.
If the VM approach is truly less risky, seems to me the Xen/VMware
developers should be able to succeed independently, despite changes
made for in-kernel virtualization.
I'm glad someone asked a question I could answer. :-)
-
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]
