Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 27 Mar 2006 23:28:12 -0500 | From | Bill Davidsen <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] Virtualization steps |
| |
Dave Hansen wrote: > On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 04:33 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote: >> Oh, after you come to an agreement and start posting patches, can you >> also outline why we want this in the kernel (what it does that low >> level virtualization doesn't, etc, etc) > > Can you wait for an OLS paper? ;) > > I'll summarize it this way: low-level virtualization uses resource > inefficiently. > > With this higher-level stuff, you get to share all of the Linux caching, > and can do things like sharing libraries pretty naturally. > > They are also much lighter-weight to create and destroy than full > virtual machines. We were planning on doing some performance > comparisons versus some hypervisors like Xen and the ppc64 one to show > scaling with the number of virtualized instances. Creating 100 of these > Linux containers is as easy as a couple of shell scripts, but we still > can't find anybody crazy enough to go create 100 Xen VMs.
But these require a modified O/S, do they not? Or do I read that incorrectly? Is this going to be real virtualization able to run any O/S?
Frankly I don't see running 100 VMs as a realistic goal, being able to run Linux, Windows, Solaris and BEOS unmodified in 4-5 VMs would be far more useful. > > Anyway, those are the things that came to my mind first. I'm sure the > others involved have their own motivations. > > -- Dave >
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |