This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


RE: [Xen-users] The death of XEN by Novell

To: "'eric gisse'" <jowr.pi@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-users] The death of XEN by Novell
From: "Venefax" <venefax@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2008 10:27:25 -0400
Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Sun, 20 Jul 2008 07:28:41 -0700
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:cc:references :in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:thread-index:content-language; bh=KoyLwSpzkWLpRcfp4tZDQzLYY0dfRtfENaH9Wvhg3sg=; b=Ysvt9rcLZ2nrNrXvJAwKENnWx1TmHqhgz723/n1W4oxPUEvIJZ12LImCBP4Lg740Uf kQM4/C57Lo4WFkceZCTVr1cdym05Pvklisq78tdSsQs5JcyX7MJ2L8wpe/7JK6Hia4n1 8f8zEGJd+b4FcvsxZboONiQ0aut51d0VtHStY=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer :thread-index:content-language; b=eCzOstzsuumBiyWXdxCb1mBa9L6ZLg0YX8VgkUD8Rch7imCa4vgDwoDjPO4rwkFXPB ULRW8eNsQJynxCnZ62Xto6RTp8l0dw0e/tFu/CCDhWKlyBFoTz7znibQvFMQFf6STLTV DBTz2hMBSjTmYlY+mAYpd2+stXbmRMEJdN7kg=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <929ed0f80807200706s8da20fdxf3a0288b7eeedb8f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-users@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <fc1cbedb0807170903s1f539b8aj32017e643bbd2853@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200807172153.44456.mark.williamson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <039901c8e9c2$e5dd4530$b197cf90$@com> <AEC6C66638C05B468B556EA548C1A77D0148FF2C@trantor> <046901c8ea21$1a402190$4ec064b0$@com> <20080720131211.GE3771@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20080720134155.GF3771@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <049401c8ea6f$c4b031d0$4e109570$@com> <929ed0f80807200706s8da20fdxf3a0288b7eeedb8f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcjqccqFt2L+g+dHQHy0j7sEZpvQnQAAf5vw
Thanks for your comments. I need SMP since I use SQL Server inside Windows.
The Windows domu is just a wrapper for SQL Server. Without SMP I am dead.
The problem is that it crashes unexpectedly, so it cannot be trusted for
mission critical. You also want me to consider carefully before investing
$15.000. I lost already $5000 in one hour down. My XEN box moves $200.000 a
day in phone calls, all in one box with 6 Linux VM's and 3 windows VM's. Do
you see the point? I don't care if Novell would have charged me 10 times
more, as long as it works. The problem now is that to co-locate another big
box with 11 Amp of power consumption, I need to pay a lot of money per month
in hosting fees. So the effect is devastating for my business, it affects my
bottom line, since the profit is tiny.

-----Original Message-----
From: eric gisse [mailto:jowr.pi@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2008 10:06 AM
To: Venefax
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] The death of XEN by Novell

I dunno, I'm in the process of setting up a bunch [60] dual core
workstations utilizing Xen with a windows and linux virtual machine
[HVM, PV] which will be utilized for general student work [Windows]
and clustering [Linux]. My testing so far has been remarkably
successful so I'm in the process of fully deploying it on a test
machine in preparation for a full deployment that's contingent on it

Isn't the point of running Xen that you can have _many_ virtual
machines? Ok - worst case you cannot use many CPUs with a windows HVM.
So what? You have a tremendously powerful box - install more virtual

As for the performance of linux under virtualization, from the
benchmarks I have read you only lose ~5% performance by using a
_properly_ configured paravirtualized linux. However I'm not exactly
clear on your needs - are you doing the software routing [iptables?
ipcop? zebra? some other software router?] under virtualization or
within the hypervisor itself?

Not to be a purposeful dick though, but did you actually test out the
environment you wanted to build? What troubleshooting have you done?
Are you sure it is Xen and not some fault that propagated back into
the VM's and killed them?

Since you are now plunking down another 15k on _another_ box, might I
suggest you calm the hell down and think for a little while before
spending more money? It sounds - to me - that rash decisionmaking got
you into this, and it won't get you out in any painless fashion.


Xen-users mailing list