[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Using the -xen kernel rather than -xen0/U was [Xen-users] Poorhard disk performance on xen-3/dom0
- To: Ian Pratt <m+Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Anand <xen.mails@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 2 Jan 2006 18:23:12 +0530
- Cc: ian.pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx, "Eric S. Johansson" <esj@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, David H <davidh.davidh@xxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 12:58:14 +0000
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=klO3qDDcKEXPY8BgY7rqa9s2sQGF/bfl1uEZ+ECW8wlQ1FJlqlknfnPjdFtzxVgC9N3P1dq3oRnuW01cMz/ytRUc2gkXRQw1BV6CU/MtRD3uGTqXYvXy9NsB7TspOvPONecbhZm2nuOeXpIJwZbW5JfsQZbG51x6mPTGXquX56g=
- List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>
Thanks for the information. I will try the unstable out. However will still love to see it out in stable version.
On 1/1/06, Ian Pratt <
m+Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Thanks for the reply Ian. Fernando on this list told me about
> the vifname parameter being excluded from xen 3.0 (doesn't
> work either when i try to use it inside the config) and was
> reincluded in unstable, any ideas when it would make it to
> the stable /rpm.
There's a few things we want to get into to -unstable before we roll
3.0.1, such as the xen subarch changes and 2.6.14. Maybe 2-4 weeks.
With all the regression testing, the -unstable tree is usually stable
(unless you're unlucky and get a bad changeset), so plenty of people do
use it in production.
Ian
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
