[Discuss] PS: Most virtuous virtual boxen?

Patrick Nixniq-sneaking at sneakEmail.com
Mon Feb 9 02:00:44 PST 2015


Sorry, just realized I'd asked about this almost exactly a year
ago...
    http://lists.vlug.org/pipermail/discuss/2014-January/000082.html

...And got some really good answers.  Thanks for those.

If there have been any noteworthy developments since then, I'd
still like to hear about them.  I'd be especially interested in
comparisons between Xen and KVM -- supported OSes, performance
degradation [and hopefully, the lack thereof] in guest systems,
etc;
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernel-based_Virtual_Machine
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xen

Currently putting together an eight-core machine with 12GB
memory, so multitasking will certainly be an option.  8-)


Thanks... again,
Patrick.


On Sun, 8 Feb 2015 21:57:19 -0800
I wrote:

> Anyone here have any experience with Xen?
>     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xen
> 
> If so, what do you think of it?  If not, or if your opinion is
> not favourable, what sort of virtual boxen would you recommend,
> and why?
> 
> I kind of like the *idea* of Xen, because it runs as a kernel in
> its own right, portioning out hardware access to various guest
> OSes -- instead of as a user program which runs *inside* a host
> OS, which in turn builds virtual machines within itself for
> various guest OSes to live in.  Cuts out a few middlemen, that
> way, abstracts the hardware a little less.  It also makes the
> overall system less like a Russian doll and/or onion, avoiding
> layer upon layer of containers holding containers.
> 
> But that's only in theory.  What about in practise?
> 
> Also, a little off-topic, but not entirely because it might
> occupy a virtual box, is it true that Windows XP can only
> utilize one CPU, no matter how many cores it's given to play
> with?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Patrick.

-- 
Barker's Proof:
	Proofreading is more effective after publication.



More information about the Discuss mailing list