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.
prev parent 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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox