Re: Xen and VMware

[aq <aquynh@gmail.com>]

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 14:50:23 -0800, Jacob Gorm Hansen <jacobg@diku.dk> wrote:
> Tom Hibbert wrote:
> > Typical corporate talking head blah. Interesting that he talks about
> > Vmotion as a 'killer technology' when Xen is already doing it.
> > If you read the interview there's quite a bit of Xen-bashing. The guy
> > rags on the requirement for modification of the host kernel. He is
> > comparing the two products as if they took the same approach, failing to
> > mention that Xen's paravirtualisation architecture eliminates all of the
> > costly performance overhead his company's product is famous for...
> 
> I still think you need to respect VMWare for breathing new life into
> virtual machine research. And I still think Xen can be improved (as is
> happening now) with regards to memory footprint etc. VMWare ESX is also
> likely to have some performance benefits from having the drivers in the
> kernel, even though that comes at the cost of them having to implement
> the drivers themselves. And the fact that they can host Windows is a big
> win with lots of customers.
> 
> VMWare does some amount of paravirtualization, with all the VMWare tools
> that you need to install. In fact, Xen seems to be going in VMWare's
> direction (shadow page tables, writable page tables, binary rewriting,
> Vanderpool support) in some areas.

Jacob, I am surprised here. Which code in Xen that does "binary rewriting"?

Thank you,
AQ


-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click