On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Christian Zoffoli
<czoffoli@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
debian and xen are actually in different planets ...live migration is a
pain and there are many problems in general.
If you whant something stable, updated and so on, suse sles 11 sp1 is
the way.
Here are the main reasons:
- it's based on xen 4.0 + many interesting additions (for example
virtual machines snapshots --> **not only disk snapshots**)
- it's integrated with the new cluster stack (pacemaker and friends)
- it's integrated with OCFS2 (with many interesting patches in the tree)
- it's integrated with CLVM (on pacemaker & friends)
- it has pv over hvm drivers for linux and windows (in linux pv over hvm
for 64bit VMs is better performing)
- it has a fully working and certified infiniband stack
- it's more lightweight than redhat (it's possible to make very light
installations comparable in size/occupied resources to debian)
- suse xen kernel is also the starting point of the citrix xenserver
...so it's not something different / unmaintained etc
>From a performance perspective I suggest you to directly use CLVM for VM
images storage because I've seen poor performances in QCOW2 over OCFS2
setups.
The only big problem I can see in the future of suse is the acquisition
by a microsoft controlled company of novell ...by the way also citrix is
very microsoft dependant ...so the soup is almost the same.
Best regards,
Christian
Hard to argue with that level of functionality & integration. I'll have to look at sles 11 too.
-Bruce
