Re: Intel-only or AMD Opteron as well?

[Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>]

Fernando Cassia wrote:
>
>
> Point #1:
>
> I just wish someone had thought more about the name before selecting 
> "KVM" ... because Sun has been using KVM (the K Virtual Machine) for 
> its Java VM for embedded devices for some time. This just causes 
> confusion on web searches...
>
> The K Virtual Machine (KVM)
> http://java.sun.com/products/cldc/wp/
>
> In any case... choosing somthing like "Kernel-VM" instead of the KVM 
> moniker would have been less confusing. But hey... no big deal... but 
> still if you ever decide to change the name...
>

Hey, don't rub it in.  In any case the name can't be changed now, we 
have to live with it.

>
> Point #3: Xen vs KVM... I'm confused
>
> The above move by RedHat is a bit confusing... what can Xen do that 
> KVM cannot?. In other words, why should anyone even bother with Xen 
> with KVM around ??.  I've read Xen is "more robust" because it has a 
> "one year lead" over KVM. But really, how does this translate, if 
> performance of Xen could be worse due to more paravirtualization?.  Or 
> is Xen more optimized to provide the "greatest possible consolidation" 
> on servers (ie less resource usage, less impact on cpu usage of a high 
> number of VMs?).

kvm is too new to have been included in RHEL 5.  The enterprise distros 
have a long lead time where the technology is tested and fixed, they 
don't pick the latest kernel off kernel.org and ship it the next day.  I 
think RHEL 5 is based on 2.6.18, whereas kvm was first merged in 2.6.20 
and gained guest smp support in 2.6.23.

Xen can also run virtual machines on older processors, but this is 
changing with kvm-lite.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/