Re: [Xen-users] Paravirtualized vs HVM - how big is the performa

2009/3/27 Tim Edwards <tedwards@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Ferreira, N. L. (Nuno) wrote:
>> Ok.
>> So go for a SL 4.7 installation, unless you really need the 4.3 one.

> Unfortunately I've found out that I can't - we need to run certain
> custom software that's only certified and supported on SL 4.3. I'm going
> to try copying the images/xen/ directory from 4.5 (the earliest version
> that has that) into my 4.3 tree.

... and running it under Xen instead of bare-metal wouldn't break
certification/support?
Seriously, if certification is your main concern then stick with
bare-metal, until that software is certified under Xen. However if
your main concern is "getting it to work with maximum performance", go
with SL 4.7

I believe there's a similar case, where Oracle database is certified
to run under Oracle VM, but NOT under the built-in Xen included in
RHEL or Oracle Enterprise Linux. Even if it runs under RHEL/Xen
there's no point in doing so if support is a primary concern.

Regards,

Fajar

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users

<Prev in Thread]

Current Thread

[Next in Thread>

Previous by Date:

Re: [Xen-users] Paravirtualized vs HVM - how big is the performance gap?, Tim Edwards

Next by Date:

[Xen-users] Weekly Community Status, Stephen Spector

Previous by Thread:

Re: [Xen-users] Paravirtualized vs HVM - how big is the performance gap?, Tim Edwards

Next by Thread:

Re: [Xen-users] Paravirtualized vs HVM - how big is the performance gap?, Steven Timm

Indexes:

[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]