All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
To: Federico Simoncelli <federico.simoncelli@gmail.com>
Cc: KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Choosing the right KVM version for production on CentOS 5.3
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 2009 09:44:21 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A2B61C5.3010707@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a01fe36d0906050139p5e8217b2ld7ab8e1c7a48ea1a@mail.gmail.com>

Federico Simoncelli wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm trying to switch from xen to kvm. I already successfully installed
> and tested kvm-84 on a CentOS 5.3 but before put it in production I'd
> like some advices from you:
>
> 1) I'm trying to settle and use one version of kvm maybe backporting
> some patches when needed. What version do you suggest me to use in a
> production environment?
>   

For production, use kvm-kmod-2.6.30-rc8 (and its updates), and 
qemu-kvm-0.10.5 (and its updates).

> 2) I'm pretty much confused about kvm-x and qemu-kvm, anyway I used
> kvm-84 with no problem and lately I'm testing qemu-kvm 0.10.5 with the
> kvm-84 kernel module. Is this combination (kvm-84 kernel module and
> qemu-kvm 0.10.5) right? Is there a better one?
>   

kvm-xx are really development snapshots; they undergo testing but they 
don't get fixes backported.  If you are interested in minimal churn and 
maximum stability, use the combination above.

> 3) What is the difference between qemu-kvm 0.10.5 (on the kvm
> sourceforge site) and qemu 0.10.5. Which one do you suggest me to use
> in a production environment?
>   

qemu-kvm-0.10.5 is qemu-0.10.5 with improved kvm integration (for 
example, smp) and a few additional features.  Use qemu-kvm 0.10.5 for 
best performance and stability.

> 4) I saw that the rpm packages for CentOS (provided by lfarkas.org)
> are based on qemu 0.10.4, is there a reason? is it a very stable
> release? I tried to contact Farkas but I had no reply yet.
>   

No idea, I hope the packages will be updated soon.

> The last question might be split in a new thread:
>
> 5) I tried to use qcow2 images with migration (storing them on gfs)
> but the migration fails very frequently (mostly on heavy disk load). I
> think the problem is that the new qemu-kvm (the -incoming one) reads
> (or tries to read) the qcow2 headers before receiving the full ram
> memory image and during the transfer time the qcow2 file get modified
> by the old qemu-kvm (the dying one) which flushes the disk cache. Is
> anyone else trying to let qcow2 work with migration?
>   

qcow2 works with migration, there might be issues with GFS though.  Can 
you try qemu-kvm 0.10.5 with qcow2 over NFS?  If that works for you, we 
can try to debug the GFS issue.

-- 
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.


      reply	other threads:[~2009-06-07  6:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-06-05  8:39 Choosing the right KVM version for production on CentOS 5.3 Federico Simoncelli
2009-06-07  6:44 ` Avi Kivity [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4A2B61C5.3010707@redhat.com \
    --to=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=federico.simoncelli@gmail.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.