Doug Breshears
2008-Apr-06 21:53 UTC
Re: [Xen-users] Xen 3.2.0 on debian etch, many kernel panics
>/ these are the packages installed:/ > >/ ii linux-image-2.6.18-6-xen-amd64 2.6.18.dfsg.1-18etch1 / >/ Linux 2.6.18 image on AMD64/ >/ ii linux-modules-2.6.18-6-xen-amd64 2.6.18.dfsg.1-18etch1 / >/ Linux 2.6.18 modules on AMD64/ >/ ii xen-hypervisor-3.2-1-amd64 3.2.0-2 / >/ The Xen Hypervisor on AMD64// ------ SNIP ----- />/ This actually happens in several new machines i''m testing. I''ve run disk / >/ and memory tests on them and no problem reported at all./ >/ They are intel quad core, 8 virtual cpus./ > >/ Do you have any idea where my problem is?/ >Does it not seem weird that you are using AMD64 packages on an Intel server? _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Is there a consensus on which distro is the best for running a Xen dom0? I have tried Debian Etch (Xen 3.0.3/2.4.18 kernel) but it was having problems with the domU''s thinking the (virtual) hard drive was bad. I upgraded to Xen 3.2 hypervisor and tools (Using Etch Backports) and that helped quite a bit (errors are not fatal but still there) but this left the kernel untouched and I assumed that it would be best to get a kernel compiled with the same version of hypervisor you are using. I then tried Ubuntu Gutsy (Xen 3.1/2.6.22 kernel) but the domU guests hang while booting. I would prefer a Debian Etch dom0 but will go with whatever works best. So to clarify.. Is there a Xen distro package / Kernel package combination that works best? I would consider compiling from scratch but I am not sure that would do any better. Any suggestions? Thanks. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Hello, Check out the CentOS 5.1 distro. It''s been a dream for me. I''ve tried a few so far - Fedora 8 & Xen Source 3.1/3.2 -> Major tweaks needed on my system CentOS 5/5.1 -> No Problems at all Ubuntu -> HVM Guests were laggy and using up way to much I/O Give CentOS a shot. :) -Tait Clarridge -----Original Message----- From: xen-users-bounces@lists.xensource.com [mailto:xen-users-bounces@lists.xensource.com] On Behalf Of Doug Breshears Sent: Monday, April 07, 2008 2:35 PM To: xen-users@lists.xensource.com Subject: [Xen-users] Most stable Xen distro? Is there a consensus on which distro is the best for running a Xen dom0? I have tried Debian Etch (Xen 3.0.3/2.4.18 kernel) but it was having problems with the domU''s thinking the (virtual) hard drive was bad. I upgraded to Xen 3.2 hypervisor and tools (Using Etch Backports) and that helped quite a bit (errors are not fatal but still there) but this left the kernel untouched and I assumed that it would be best to get a kernel compiled with the same version of hypervisor you are using. I then tried Ubuntu Gutsy (Xen 3.1/2.6.22 kernel) but the domU guests hang while booting. I would prefer a Debian Etch dom0 but will go with whatever works best. So to clarify.. Is there a Xen distro package / Kernel package combination that works best? I would consider compiling from scratch but I am not sure that would do any better. Any suggestions? Thanks. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
I had *very* bad Ubuntu/Xen experiences, even with Hardy Heron. As much as i''m loathe to recommend a non-debian based dist, it appears that most of the happy successful users, use Redhat (fedora? possibly CentOS) I might be wrong, the Ubuntu packages ended up crashing my machine multiple times in a day because of kernel bugs on high I/O Henri Doug Breshears wrote:> Is there a consensus on which distro is the best for running a Xen dom0? > I have tried Debian Etch (Xen 3.0.3/2.4.18 kernel) but it was having > problems with the domU''s thinking the (virtual) hard drive was bad. > I upgraded to Xen 3.2 hypervisor and tools (Using Etch Backports) and > that helped quite a bit (errors are not fatal but still there) but > this left the kernel untouched and I assumed that it would be best to > get a kernel compiled with the same version of hypervisor you are using. > > I then tried Ubuntu Gutsy (Xen 3.1/2.6.22 kernel) but the domU guests > hang while booting. > > I would prefer a Debian Etch dom0 but will go with whatever works best. > > So to clarify.. Is there a Xen distro package / Kernel package > combination that works best? > I would consider compiling from scratch but I am not sure that would > do any better. > > Any suggestions? > Thanks. > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-users mailing list > Xen-users@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users_______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Tait Clarridge wrote:> Hello, > > Check out the CentOS 5.1 distro. It''s been a dream for me. > > I''ve tried a few so far - > > Fedora 8 & Xen Source 3.1/3.2 -> Major tweaks needed on my system > CentOS 5/5.1 -> No Problems at all > Ubuntu -> HVM Guests were laggy and using up way to much I/O > > > Give CentOS a shot. :)Be aware that if you want to do 64bit dom0 and 32-bit paravirtualized domU it is not going to work on Centos (and friends). I''ve heard this will be fixed in the next update. Steve> > -Tait Clarridge > > -----Original Message----- > From: xen-users-bounces@lists.xensource.com > [mailto:xen-users-bounces@lists.xensource.com] On Behalf Of Doug > Breshears > Sent: Monday, April 07, 2008 2:35 PM > To: xen-users@lists.xensource.com > Subject: [Xen-users] Most stable Xen distro? > > Is there a consensus on which distro is the best for running a Xen dom0? > I have tried Debian Etch (Xen 3.0.3/2.4.18 kernel) but it was having > problems with the domU''s thinking the (virtual) hard drive was bad. > I upgraded to Xen 3.2 hypervisor and tools (Using Etch Backports) and > that helped quite a bit (errors are not fatal but still there) but this > left the kernel untouched and I assumed that it would be best to get a > kernel compiled with the same version of hypervisor you are using. > > I then tried Ubuntu Gutsy (Xen 3.1/2.6.22 kernel) but the domU guests > hang while booting. > > I would prefer a Debian Etch dom0 but will go with whatever works best. > > So to clarify.. Is there a Xen distro package / Kernel package > combination that works best? > I would consider compiling from scratch but I am not sure that would do > any better. > > Any suggestions? > Thanks. > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-users mailing list > Xen-users@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users > > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-users mailing list > Xen-users@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users >-- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Steven C. Timm, Ph.D (630) 840-8525 timm@fnal.gov http://home.fnal.gov/~timm/ Fermilab Computing Division, Scientific Computing Facilities, Grid Facilities Department, FermiGrid Services Group, Assistant Group Leader. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
> Is there a consensus on which distro is the best for running a Xen dom0? > I have tried Debian Etch (Xen 3.0.3/2.4.18 kernel) but it was having > problems with the domU''s thinking the (virtual) hard drive was bad. > I upgraded to Xen 3.2 hypervisor and tools (Using Etch Backports) and that > helped quite a bit (errors are not fatal but still there) but this left the > kernel untouched and I assumed that it would be best to get a kernel > compiled with the same version of hypervisor you are using. > > I then tried Ubuntu Gutsy (Xen 3.1/2.6.22 kernel) but the domU guests hang > while booting. > > I would prefer a Debian Etch dom0 but will go with whatever works best. > > So to clarify.. Is there a Xen distro package / Kernel package combination > that works best? > I would consider compiling from scratch but I am not sure that would do any > better. > > Any suggestions?I setup my Xen box on 3.0.1 back almost two years ago. I tried really hard to use a Debian dom0 but was unable to get it to work - notably at the time it didn''t have drivers for my SATA card, so I tried building my own kernel. Wasn''t very happy with the fragility of the setup, so I went to CentOS 4 and it worked amazingly well. Honestly, you don''t do much with the dom0. If you''re doing Xen right, your dom0 is almost untouched. Just sits there. So I can highly recommend using something that works really well (CentOS, Fedora Core, etc) and putting Debian/Ubuntu/etc as your domUs. That''s what I do! Just last week I updated to Xen 3.2 as well, and things are running great right now. Caveat lector: I am using Xen kernels I compiled myself, I am not using any distro packaged anything. I probably could use packaged stuff with 3.2, but back in the 3.0.1 days, the packages weren''t that good IMO. If you use the packages, your experience may vary. :) -- Mark Smith / xb95 smitty@gmail.com _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
I personally run Ubuntu 7.04. I had to do a little magic with libtls, but that was about it. After a few failed trials, I got it up and running. My hardware only supports paravirtualization, so I''m not able to comment on HVM performance. That said, the PV performance has been very good -- I have yet to have Xen or any of my DomUs (Ubuntu 7.04, and one CentOS 5.1 on the way) crash. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Even on the risk to start the usual distro-flame, i just add, my gentoo 64bit 3.2 xen runs pretty good based on 2.6.21 -xen sources. Florian Mark Smith schrieb:>> Is there a consensus on which distro is the best for running a Xen dom0? >> I have tried Debian Etch (Xen 3.0.3/2.4.18 kernel) but it was having >> problems with the domU''s thinking the (virtual) hard drive was bad. >> I upgraded to Xen 3.2 hypervisor and tools (Using Etch Backports) and that >> helped quite a bit (errors are not fatal but still there) but this left the >> kernel untouched and I assumed that it would be best to get a kernel >> compiled with the same version of hypervisor you are using. >> >> I then tried Ubuntu Gutsy (Xen 3.1/2.6.22 kernel) but the domU guests hang >> while booting. >> >> I would prefer a Debian Etch dom0 but will go with whatever works best. >> >> So to clarify.. Is there a Xen distro package / Kernel package combination >> that works best? >> I would consider compiling from scratch but I am not sure that would do any >> better. >> >> Any suggestions? > > I setup my Xen box on 3.0.1 back almost two years ago. I tried really > hard to use a Debian dom0 but was unable to get it to work - notably > at the time it didn''t have drivers for my SATA card, so I tried > building my own kernel. Wasn''t very happy with the fragility of the > setup, so I went to CentOS 4 and it worked amazingly well. > > Honestly, you don''t do much with the dom0. If you''re doing Xen right, > your dom0 is almost untouched. Just sits there. So I can highly > recommend using something that works really well (CentOS, Fedora Core, > etc) and putting Debian/Ubuntu/etc as your domUs. That''s what I do! > > Just last week I updated to Xen 3.2 as well, and things are running > great right now. > > Caveat lector: I am using Xen kernels I compiled myself, I am not > using any distro packaged anything. I probably could use packaged > stuff with 3.2, but back in the 3.0.1 days, the packages weren''t that > good IMO. If you use the packages, your experience may vary. :) > >_______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Ah yes, excellent point. Thanks Steven for adding that. -----Original Message----- From: Steven Timm [mailto:timm@fnal.gov] Sent: Monday, April 07, 2008 2:45 PM To: Tait Clarridge Cc: Doug Breshears; xen-users@lists.xensource.com Subject: RE: [Xen-users] Most stable Xen distro? On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Tait Clarridge wrote:> Hello, > > Check out the CentOS 5.1 distro. It''s been a dream for me. > > I''ve tried a few so far - > > Fedora 8 & Xen Source 3.1/3.2 -> Major tweaks needed on my system > CentOS 5/5.1 -> No Problems at all > Ubuntu -> HVM Guests were laggy and using up way to much I/O > > > Give CentOS a shot. :)Be aware that if you want to do 64bit dom0 and 32-bit paravirtualized domU it is not going to work on Centos (and friends). I''ve heard this will be fixed in the next update. Steve> > -Tait Clarridge > > -----Original Message----- > From: xen-users-bounces@lists.xensource.com > [mailto:xen-users-bounces@lists.xensource.com] On Behalf Of Doug > Breshears > Sent: Monday, April 07, 2008 2:35 PM > To: xen-users@lists.xensource.com > Subject: [Xen-users] Most stable Xen distro? > > Is there a consensus on which distro is the best for running a Xendom0?> I have tried Debian Etch (Xen 3.0.3/2.4.18 kernel) but it was having > problems with the domU''s thinking the (virtual) hard drive was bad. > I upgraded to Xen 3.2 hypervisor and tools (Using Etch Backports) and > that helped quite a bit (errors are not fatal but still there) butthis> left the kernel untouched and I assumed that it would be best to get a > kernel compiled with the same version of hypervisor you are using. > > I then tried Ubuntu Gutsy (Xen 3.1/2.6.22 kernel) but the domU guests > hang while booting. > > I would prefer a Debian Etch dom0 but will go with whatever worksbest.> > So to clarify.. Is there a Xen distro package / Kernel package > combination that works best? > I would consider compiling from scratch but I am not sure that woulddo> any better. > > Any suggestions? > Thanks. > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-users mailing list > Xen-users@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users > > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-users mailing list > Xen-users@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users >-- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Steven C. Timm, Ph.D (630) 840-8525 timm@fnal.gov http://home.fnal.gov/~timm/ Fermilab Computing Division, Scientific Computing Facilities, Grid Facilities Department, FermiGrid Services Group, Assistant Group Leader. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
> Be aware that if you want to do 64bit dom0 and 32-bit paravirtualized > domU it is not going to work on Centos (and friends). I''ve heard > this will be fixed in the next update. > > SteveWhat''s the technical reason behind that? Will a x64 CentOS Dom0 run an x86 HVM w/o any issues? Thanks! jlc _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Yep, it will run x64 HVMs no problem. I don''t know the specifics of the bug though, sorry. -----Original Message----- From: xen-users-bounces@lists.xensource.com [mailto:xen-users-bounces@lists.xensource.com] On Behalf Of Joseph L. Casale Sent: Monday, April 07, 2008 3:14 PM To: xen-users@lists.xensource.com Subject: RE: [Xen-users] Most stable Xen distro?> Be aware that if you want to do 64bit dom0 and 32-bit paravirtualized > domU it is not going to work on Centos (and friends). I''ve heard > this will be fixed in the next update. > > SteveWhat''s the technical reason behind that? Will a x64 CentOS Dom0 run an x86 HVM w/o any issues? Thanks! jlc _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
On Mon, 7 Apr 2008, Joseph L. Casale wrote:>> Be aware that if you want to do 64bit dom0 and 32-bit paravirtualized >> domU it is not going to work on Centos (and friends). I''ve heard >> this will be fixed in the next update. >> >> Steve > > What''s the technical reason behind that? Will a x64 CentOS Dom0 run an x86 HVM w/o any issues?Centos'' "upstream vendor" (the big guys with the hat) say in their release notes that 32 on 64 is a "Technology Preview". Works fine unless you actually want to do any I/O of any sort. It is claimed by many on this list that HVM 32bit on 64bit dom0 works on centos but I have never tried it myself. Steve Timm> > Thanks! > jlc > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-users mailing list > Xen-users@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users >-- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Steven C. Timm, Ph.D (630) 840-8525 timm@fnal.gov http://home.fnal.gov/~timm/ Fermilab Computing Division, Scientific Computing Facilities, Grid Facilities Department, FermiGrid Services Group, Assistant Group Leader. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Joseph, x86 HVM''s run fine under CentOS 5.1 and Xen 3.2.0 (or default 3.1 for that matter) for me (e.g. trixbox 2.6.0.7, QMT Plus, etc.) Tait, Not sure about x86_64 HVM''s though... I was under the assumption that x86_64 HVM''s were still not supported unless it has changed. Tait Clarridge wrote: Yep, it will run x64 HVMs no problem. I don''t know the specifics of the bug though, sorry. -----Original Message----- From: xen-users-bounces@lists.xensource.com [mailto:xen-users-bounces@lists.xensource.com] On Behalf Of Joseph L. Casale Sent: Monday, April 07, 2008 3:14 PM To: xen-users@lists.xensource.com Subject: RE: [Xen-users] Most stable Xen distro? Be aware that if you want to do 64bit dom0 and 32-bit paravirtualized domU it is not going to work on Centos (and friends). I''ve heard this will be fixed in the next update. Steve What''s the technical reason behind that? Will a x64 CentOS Dom0 run an x86 HVM w/o any issues? Thanks! jlc _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users -- Daniel Kao Übermind, Inc. dkao@ubermind.com Seattle, WA, U.S.A. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Daniel, I have had no problems with x86_64 HVMs so far. Both Linux and Windows. Just re-read that and it seems I didn''t answer the question at all haha. In my experience, both x86 and x86_64 have worked flawlessly. Only tested 64-bit domU''s and those work (obviously). Sorry for the mixup. Tait From: xen-users-bounces@lists.xensource.com [mailto:xen-users-bounces@lists.xensource.com] On Behalf Of Daniel Kao Sent: Monday, April 07, 2008 3:23 PM To: xen-users@lists.xensource.com Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Most stable Xen distro? Joseph, x86 HVM''s run fine under CentOS 5.1 and Xen 3.2.0 (or default 3.1 for that matter) for me (e.g. trixbox 2.6.0.7, QMT Plus, etc.) Tait, Not sure about x86_64 HVM''s though... I was under the assumption that x86_64 HVM''s were still not supported unless it has changed. Tait Clarridge wrote: Yep, it will run x64 HVMs no problem. I don''t know the specifics of the bug though, sorry. -----Original Message----- From: xen-users-bounces@lists.xensource.com [mailto:xen-users-bounces@lists.xensource.com] On Behalf Of Joseph L. Casale Sent: Monday, April 07, 2008 3:14 PM To: xen-users@lists.xensource.com Subject: RE: [Xen-users] Most stable Xen distro? Be aware that if you want to do 64bit dom0 and 32-bit paravirtualized domU it is not going to work on Centos (and friends). I''ve heard this will be fixed in the next update. Steve What''s the technical reason behind that? Will a x64 CentOS Dom0 run an x86 HVM w/o any issues? Thanks! jlc _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users -- Daniel Kao Übermind, Inc. dkao@ubermind.com Seattle, WA, U.S.A. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Tait, Well hot dang! I wasn''t even aware that x86_64''s were supported under HVM''s now! I''ll have to give it a go-around then! No apologies needed. I''m sure we''ve answered the OP''s questions in regards to 32-bit PV domU''s under x64_64 hosts. ;) Cheers, Daniel Tait Clarridge wrote: Daniel, I have had no problems with x86_64 HVMs so far. Both Linux and Windows. Just re-read that and it seems I didn’t answer the question at all haha. In my experience, both x86 and x86_64 have worked flawlessly. Only tested 64-bit domU’s and those work (obviously). Sorry for the mixup. Tait -- Daniel Kao Übermind, Inc. dkao@ubermind.com Seattle, WA, U.S.A. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
You,re right, the ubuntu xenified kernels can''t be used for productive use. I don''t know why the ubuntu guys are porting to the 2.6.24. I might be wrong, but even on latest server hardware, Xen''s 2.6.18.8 is the best choice if want to get rid of dom0 panics ;) Henri Cook schrieb:> I had *very* bad Ubuntu/Xen experiences, even with Hardy Heron. As much > as i''m loathe to recommend a non-debian based dist, it appears that most > of the happy successful users, use Redhat (fedora? possibly CentOS) > > I might be wrong, the Ubuntu packages ended up crashing my machine > multiple times in a day because of kernel bugs on high I/O > > Henri > > Doug Breshears wrote: >> Is there a consensus on which distro is the best for running a Xen dom0? >> I have tried Debian Etch (Xen 3.0.3/2.4.18 kernel) but it was having >> problems with the domU''s thinking the (virtual) hard drive was bad. >> I upgraded to Xen 3.2 hypervisor and tools (Using Etch Backports) and >> that helped quite a bit (errors are not fatal but still there) but >> this left the kernel untouched and I assumed that it would be best to >> get a kernel compiled with the same version of hypervisor you are using. >> >> I then tried Ubuntu Gutsy (Xen 3.1/2.6.22 kernel) but the domU guests >> hang while booting.I assume, you''ve only checked via xm console? You might want to add extra=''xencons=tty1'' in your domU config to get a shell. If you want to stay with ubuntu/gutsy: I''ve recently setup a small repository which contains Xen3.2.0 for gutsy/amd64 at http://boreas.netz-haut.net/ You might also want to try 2.6.18.8 (running on different boxes w/ no problems) http://boreas.netz-haut.net/pub/kernelpack-2.6.18.8-xen.tar.gz cheers Stephan>> I would prefer a Debian Etch dom0 but will go with whatever works best. >> >> So to clarify.. Is there a Xen distro package / Kernel package >> combination that works best? >> I would consider compiling from scratch but I am not sure that would >> do any better. >> >> Any suggestions? >> Thanks. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Xen-users mailing list >> Xen-users@lists.xensource.com >> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-users mailing list > Xen-users@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users-- Stephan Seitz Senior System Administrator *netz-haut* e.K. multimediale kommunikation zweierweg 22 97074 würzburg fon: +49 931 2876247 fax: +49 931 2876248 web: www.netz-haut.de <http://www.netz-haut.de/> registriergericht: amtsgericht würzburg, hra 5054 _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
On Mon, April 7, 2008 11:35 am, Doug Breshears wrote:> Is there a consensus on which distro is the best for running a Xen dom0? > I have tried Debian Etch (Xen 3.0.3/2.4.18 kernel) but it was having > problems with the domU''s thinking the (virtual) hard drive was bad.I don''t know if there is a consensus but so far my experience with Debian''s implementation of Xen has been less than stellar. I am having a severe problem getting it running on Etch on my router/server. So much so that it is doing things I don''t think Xen is supposed to do! Meanwhile I tested it on my laptop, also Debian Etch, and it worked first time. As much as I loathe not recommending Debian or its children I think CentOS is the most stable right now. Seems like the boys in red are really doing their hardest to make Xen a true part of the base set with very robust integration and support. -- Steve Lamb _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Hi, I had all sorts of problems with Ubuntu packaged Xen. However, I''m now running a Xen 3.2 testing with 2.6.18-xen kernel, all of which I compiled and installed myself from mercurial repositories. It works flawless with PV and HVM guests. My only complaint is that this 2.6.18 kernel is rather old and don''t detect all my hardware (like hw sensors) Emre On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:21 PM, Steve Lamb <grey@dmiyu.org> wrote:> On Mon, April 7, 2008 11:35 am, Doug Breshears wrote: > > Is there a consensus on which distro is the best for running a Xen dom0? > > I have tried Debian Etch (Xen 3.0.3/2.4.18 kernel) but it was having > > problems with the domU''s thinking the (virtual) hard drive was bad. > > I don''t know if there is a consensus but so far my experience with > Debian''s implementation of Xen has been less than stellar. I am having > a severe problem getting it running on Etch on my router/server. So > much so that it is doing things I don''t think Xen is supposed to do! > Meanwhile I tested it on my laptop, also Debian Etch, and it worked > first time. > > As much as I loathe not recommending Debian or its children I think > CentOS is the most stable right now. Seems like the boys in red are > really doing their hardest to make Xen a true part of the base set with > very robust integration and support. > > -- > Steve Lamb > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-users mailing list > Xen-users@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users >-- Emre Erenoglu erenoglu@gmail.com _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
But the 2.6.18.x dosnt support a 3Ware 9650 raid controller, and dthe official driver from 3ware are buggy. So i use the Ubuntu Dom0 kernel 2.6.20 without any problems Stephan Seitz schrieb:> You,re right, > > the ubuntu xenified kernels can''t be used for productive use. I don''t > know > why the ubuntu guys are porting to the 2.6.24. I might be wrong, but even > on latest server hardware, Xen''s 2.6.18.8 is the best choice if want to > get rid of dom0 panics ;) > > Henri Cook schrieb: >> I had *very* bad Ubuntu/Xen experiences, even with Hardy Heron. As much >> as i''m loathe to recommend a non-debian based dist, it appears that most >> of the happy successful users, use Redhat (fedora? possibly CentOS) >> >> I might be wrong, the Ubuntu packages ended up crashing my machine >> multiple times in a day because of kernel bugs on high I/O >> >> Henri >> >> Doug Breshears wrote: >>> Is there a consensus on which distro is the best for running a Xen >>> dom0? >>> I have tried Debian Etch (Xen 3.0.3/2.4.18 kernel) but it was having >>> problems with the domU''s thinking the (virtual) hard drive was bad. >>> I upgraded to Xen 3.2 hypervisor and tools (Using Etch Backports) and >>> that helped quite a bit (errors are not fatal but still there) but >>> this left the kernel untouched and I assumed that it would be best to >>> get a kernel compiled with the same version of hypervisor you are >>> using. >>> >>> I then tried Ubuntu Gutsy (Xen 3.1/2.6.22 kernel) but the domU guests >>> hang while booting. > > I assume, you''ve only checked via xm console? > You might want to add > > extra=''xencons=tty1'' > > in your domU config to get a shell. > > > If you want to stay with ubuntu/gutsy: > > I''ve recently setup a small repository which contains Xen3.2.0 for > gutsy/amd64 > at http://boreas.netz-haut.net/ > > You might also want to try 2.6.18.8 (running on different boxes w/ no > problems) > http://boreas.netz-haut.net/pub/kernelpack-2.6.18.8-xen.tar.gz > > cheers > > Stephan > > > > >>> I would prefer a Debian Etch dom0 but will go with whatever works best. >>> >>> So to clarify.. Is there a Xen distro package / Kernel package >>> combination that works best? >>> I would consider compiling from scratch but I am not sure that would >>> do any better. >>> >>> Any suggestions? >>> Thanks. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Xen-users mailing list >>> Xen-users@lists.xensource.com >>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Xen-users mailing list >> Xen-users@lists.xensource.com >> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users > > > _______________________________________________ > Xen-users mailing list > Xen-users@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users_______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 11:35:27AM -0700, Doug Breshears wrote:> Is there a consensus on which distro is the best for running a Xen dom0? > I have tried Debian Etch (Xen 3.0.3/2.4.18 kernel) but it was having > problems with the domU''s thinking the (virtual) hard drive was bad. > I upgraded to Xen 3.2 hypervisor and tools (Using Etch Backports) and > that helped quite a bit (errors are not fatal but still there) but this > left the kernel untouched and I assumed that it would be best to get a > kernel compiled with the same version of hypervisor you are using. >We are running production servers on Debian Stable both in dom0 and domU without any problem. Regards Johann -- Johann Spies Telefoon: 021-808 4036 Informasietegnologie, Universiteit van Stellenbosch "Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God. And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts hearts and minds through Christ Jesus." Philippians 4:6,7 _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 12:34:35PM +0200, Johann Spies wrote:> We are running production servers on Debian Stable both in dom0 and > domU without any problem.And that is 64-bit. Regards Johann -- Johann Spies Telefoon: 021-808 4036 Informasietegnologie, Universiteit van Stellenbosch "Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God. And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts hearts and minds through Christ Jesus." Philippians 4:6,7 _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Hi list,
I have 14 xen servers running debian 4.0 with my own kernel based on
official xen-3.2 sources with backported userspace. The systems are
arranged into a cluster with iscsi storage. So far the performance and
stability of the setup is the best I''ve seen. I started off with debian
4.0/stable (xen-3.0.3, IIRC) and gradually moved with the upstream
making (backports from the testing tree) to xen-3.2. I use self-built
kernels. That works rock-solid. There are still a number of smaller
clusters (1-4 dom0''s) which are running the default release which comes
with debian 4.0, but there I haven''t experience any problems so far,
therefore I am not planning to update them any time soon.
My repo (without kernel images) is available from
deb http://www.psycast.de/local-pkgs etch main
The repo is signed with
max@nostromo:~$ gpg --fingerprint 0x7a42aa98
pub 1024D/7A42AA98 2005-12-30
Key fingerprint = 63CF CDB8 0CFC EF28 AFAB E277 C955 D031 7A42 AA98
uid Dimitri Puzin <max@psycast.de>
sub 4096g/BBC2A86E 2005-12-30
If anybody is interested, I can provide a .config. There are still some
issues with installation of the kernel into grub (the detection of the
xen image doesn''t happen correctly).
I''ve heard other reports (off-list) that RH/CentOS working at least as
good. I prefer debian due to the nature of the whole setup here.
I am also giving ubuntu a try from time to time, but so far I experience
it as less stable (packaging, setup) than "real" debian.
But that''s just my experience. YMMV.
Regards,
-Dimitri Puzin
Johann Spies schrieb:> On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 11:35:27AM -0700, Doug Breshears wrote:
>> Is there a consensus on which distro is the best for running a Xen
dom0?
>> I have tried Debian Etch (Xen 3.0.3/2.4.18 kernel) but it was having
>> problems with the domU''s thinking the (virtual) hard drive was
bad.
>> I upgraded to Xen 3.2 hypervisor and tools (Using Etch Backports) and
>> that helped quite a bit (errors are not fatal but still there) but this
>> left the kernel untouched and I assumed that it would be best to get a
>> kernel compiled with the same version of hypervisor you are using.
>>
>
> We are running production servers on Debian Stable both in dom0 and
> domU without any problem.
>
> Regards
> Johann
>
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 11:35:27AM -0700, Doug Breshears wrote: > Is there a consensus on which distro is the best for running a Xen dom0? no ;) arch64 here on 3 machines (15 domUs). the only mainstream distro out there that didn''t ever overwrite my grub config. -- best regards Arvid Ephraim Picciani _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Doug Breshears wrote:> Is there a consensus on which distro is the best for running a Xen dom0?OK after all the reading it appeared CentOS had the popular vote. So I download 6 CDROMS and installed on my system. I start the Virtual machine manager and fumble my way through it and manage to get a PV install started. I set the install media location to be /dev/scd0, put the first CentOS disk in and start the install. Sure enough the console window for poped up with the CentOS disk1 already booting. It gets a little ways then asks for where the install media is. I select "CDROM" and it says I do not have a device driver for that device. So I look at the other VC''s to see if there is anything there and I see that there are several errors about no drivers for "vbd". So I shutdown the VM and do a little research. Restart the VM and get "Error creating domain: Bootloader did not return any data". I assume this means that because it did not install correctly the first time, it will no longer try to boot from the CDROM. So do I have to delete the VM, start over and make it re-create a new disk image? Anybody have any clues? This does not look much different that my experience with Debian Etch. (Except this is much prettier :) I was under the impression that it "just worked" from a default install. I am a total foreigner to CentOS /RedHat so if I am supposed to add a repository and update xen from somewhere could someone point me in the right direction? Thanks for all your input. Doug Am I supposed to do anything extra like add _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
On Wednesday April 09 2008 12:20:55 am Doug Breshears wrote:> I set the install media location to be /dev/scd0, put the first CentOS > disk in and start the install. Sure enough the console window for poped > up with the CentOS disk1 already booting. It gets a little ways then > asks for where the install media is. I select "CDROM" and it says I do > not have a device driver for that device.Classic problem with Redhat. What I do is loopback mount the iso file (or mount the cd) to a directory that is exported under nfs. Other people use apache/httpd etc. to export the mount point. At worst, you can always fall back to a network install from a redhat server or mirror, at a speed penalty. Also, dvds or .isos are much less painful to work with than cds. And yeah, it''s much more straightforward to delete your first install attempt and try again. As you gain more install experience, you may be able to repair installs more. Virt-manager will change your config after the cdrom run, to delete the cdrom definition, and boot off of your created disk image. If the image doesn''t have the kernel, etc. setup, you''ll get the ''Bootloader ...'' error you saw. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users