Hi, Does anyone know has any ideas about Xen vs VirtualBox? -- Best regards, Chau Chee Yang E Stream Software Sdn Bhd URL: www.sql.com.my SQL Financial Accounting _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Hi,> Does anyone know has any ideas about Xen vs VirtualBox?Xen is more designed for headless server-consoldation while VBox is more a desktop-virtualization to run different operating systems on your host. -- Chau y hasta luego, Thorolf _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 3:30 AM, CheeYang Chau <cychau@gmail.com> wrote:> Hi, > > Does anyone know has any ideas about Xen vs VirtualBox? > > -- > Best regards, > Chau Chee Yang > > I use both on commercial consulting contracts and they''re both different.If it''s headless and I need speed and power I''ll choose Xen. If I''m in a hurry or I need GUI support I''ll choose VirtualBox. It''s interesting to note that Xen is a major pain to set up if you have no idea what you''re doing. VirtualBox on the other hand is very intuitive and you probably will never read the manual until you run into issues like the USB Any Filter not working or you need to do something special with VMs automatically booting up etc... I think if some enterprising person/company wrote a gui like VirtualBoxes for Xen then I''d probably use Xen a lot more. -- Grant McWilliams Some people, when confronted with a problem, think "I know, I''ll use Windows." Now they have two problems. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
> > >> >> I think if some enterprising person/company wrote a gui like VirtualBoxes >> for Xen then I''d probably use Xen a lot more. >> >> -- >> Grant McWilliams >> >> Some people, when confronted with a problem, think "I know, I''ll use >> Windows." >> Now they have two problems. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> > > There''s a nice web based interface to manage XEN VPs''s, called HyperVM. > > The quick answer: XEN is more intended for virtual servers, especially > where you only have SSH / remote access, whereas VirtualBox is more intended > for personal / desktop use - nice to try out windows on Linux, or MAC on > linux, etc > > > -- > > Kind Regards > Rudi Ahlers >Looks interesting but I''m not sure it''s the same type of thing. I''ve played with all the guis for Xen I could but none of them were really that intuitive. I think that Xen is an excellent product even if it''s future on RHEL looks a little bleak, although they''ve committed to keeping supporting it until 2014. I don''t use KVM for anything right now but it seems at the frantic pace that the KVM guys are hacking away there won''t be any advantage to Xen in about a year. I don''t know the long term plan for VirtualBox either as Sun has more than one VM solution, one of the others is based on Xen. I think at some point the VM software you choose will be irrelivent. I''m working on a white paper with extensive testing of all VMs for performance in a myriad of configurations. VirtualBox and Xen will both be hammered on pretty hard. -- Grant McWilliams Some people, when confronted with a problem, think "I know, I''ll use Windows." Now they have two problems. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 9:14 AM, Steve Spencer <sspencer@kdsi.net> wrote:> Personally, for production work, I prefer to have a console based > interface, which makes Xen very palatable to me. I do run VirtualBox at > home on a Linux box, and use it for starting a Windows session. It''s > nice for the 3 or 4 times every 6 months that I feel the need to use > Windows for anything. > > Thanks, > > Steven G. Spencer, Network Administrator > KSC Corporate - The Kelly Supply Family of Companies > Office 308-382-8764 Ext. 231 > Mobile 308-380-7957 >VirtualBox actually has an excellent command line and you can run it headless really easy. Then you can either access the VM by ssh or Remote Desktop. I do like the idea that I can create VMs by logging from a console. Some of the other VM products out there don''t allow this. Grant McWilliams _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 8:53 AM, Emre Erenoglu <erenoglu@gmail.com> wrote:> Hi, > > On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 4:56 PM, Grant McWilliams < > grantmasterflash@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Don''t get me wrong, I do believe Xen is a great project and I only use it >> and VirtualBox for contracts but integration is key. KVM will be in every >> Linux distribution on the planet and at some point it will do what Xen does. >> My biggest problem with it (outside of the fact that it feels like I''m just >> using a faster QEMU) is that it requires VT support in the CPU. There are >> many older really fast machines with tons of ram that you just can''t use KVM >> on. VirtualBox, VMWare and Xen run on just about anything. >> > > Well i''m just an enthusiast in these virtualization stuff. I played with > Xen since its 2.0 days. After all the issues I had with it, lacking kernel > stuff, unstability in distribution dom0 kernels etc, I left it for the > moment for KVM. > > yes KVM needs VT support but that''s becoming commodity now. Nevrtheless, > you''re right for the older machines. > > For performance, it''s getting better and better, with virtio stuff embedded > in all kernels, my guests can make gigabits/sec transfers on network > connections. With very little work. > > the management infrastructure like libvirt will more and more support KVM, > so it will only go better. > > Emre >Can people start "replying to all" instead of sending me personal messages? It''s much more productive for the list. Xen is a very different animal now and is very good and rock solid. Because it''s integrated into the two largest Linux server distros it''s very easy to set up an use as long as you understand the concept of what Xen does. Interestingly the reasons you left Xen for KVM are exactly the reason that I won''t use KVM in production. The last stable version in the RHEL line is about 36 versions old and I''ve had issues with that locking up. KVM is in my future but for now I just watch it and hang out on the dev list to keep an eye on their progress. Yes there are commodity motherboards with VT support but we''re not using that level of equipment on big projects. I have 3 racks with dual 2.8 ghz dual-core Xeons and 8 GB of ram each that can''t run KVM. Commercial Xen is probably the fastest thing out there short of ESX server which may have an edge. In certain areas KVM is getting there like network and disk access using the PV drivers. But again nobody''s going to use beta PV drivers in a production environmnet. KVM needs to bake longer. Xen and ESX have both been out there longer and are very stable. Libvert at this point is just not powerful enough. I still use the Xen config files and xm. I look forward to the time where we can have one interface to all VM products though. I would like to see QEMU moved to being a central repostitory though because all of them (Xen, KVM, and VirtualBox) rely heavily on QEMU and make modifications but the QEMU in each is not the same version. They contribute upstream but it seems to take forever for something from VBox to get to KVM or KVM to Xen. KVM IS QEMU with an accelerator according to the QEMU people. The KVM guys don''t like thinking of it that way though and I think VBox relies heavily on QEMU although VBox is much more powerful. Xen only uses it in HVM mode. I think the QEMU in Xen is the oldest which explains why KVM is faster than Xen HVM (but can''t compete in pure PV mode). -- Grant McWilliams Some people, when confronted with a problem, think "I know, I''ll use Windows." Now they have two problems. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 12:49 PM, Grant McWilliams <grantmasterflash@gmail.com> wrote:> Can people start "replying to all" instead of sending me personal messages? > It''s much more productive for the list.(OT note: gmail has recently added the ''reply to all by default'' option! and there was great rejoicing in the land)> which may have an edge. In certain areas KVM is getting there like network > and disk access using the PV drivers. But again nobody''s going to use beta > PV drivers in a production environmnet. KVM needs to bake longer. Xen and > ESX have both been out there longer and are very stable.the PV drivers are very good, and stable. where there''s much work to be done is in the QEMU side of virtio.> I would like to see QEMU moved to being a central repostitory though because > all of them (Xen, KVM, and VirtualBox) rely heavily on QEMU and make > modifications but the QEMU in each is not the same version. They contribute > upstream but it seems to take forever for something from VBox to get to KVM > or KVM to Xen. KVM IS QEMU with an accelerator according to the QEMU people.last week there was a big bunch of patches from KVM upstream to QEMU, getting closer to the goal of making KVM just the kernel module, and QEMU would just use it, like it uses kqemu.> The KVM guys don''t like thinking of it that way though and I think VBox > relies heavily on QEMU although VBox is much more powerful. Xen only uses it > in HVM mode. I think the QEMU in Xen is the oldest which explains why KVM is > faster than Xen HVM (but can''t compete in pure PV mode).i have to check more about how VBox works. unfortunately, the webpage isn''t as helpful to understand the architecture details as the Xen''s one. -- Javier _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Boris Derzhavets
2008-Sep-21 13:20 UTC
[Xen-users] Attempt to create OpenSuse 10.3 PV DomU at Xen 3.3 CentOS 5.2 Dom0 via pygrub
Attempt to reproduce:-
http://wiki.xen.prgmr.com/xenophobia/2008/08/silly-pygrub-trick.html
Profile bellow starts graphical console:-
disk =
[''tap:aio:/etc/xen/isos/opensuse-10.3.iso,xvdb:cdrom,r'',
''tap:aio:/etc/xen/images/suse.img,xvda,w'' ]
vif = [ ''mac=00:16:3e:4a:f5:f0, bridge=eth1'', ]
vfb = [ ''type=vnc,vncunused=1'' ]
# uuid = "b1fd65e84128ced2dc435bb9d2e1861e"
bootloader = "/usr/bin/pygrub"
kernel = "/boot/x86_64/vmlinuz-xen"
ramdisk = "/boot/x86_64/initrd-xen"
vcpus=1
on_reboot = ''restart''
on_crash = ''restart''
and immediately complains , that no repository was found ( on CD).
I believe either to miss correct "extra", or pygrub requires patch
(from Sun ?)
View:-
http://osdir.com/ml/linux.redhat.fedora.xen/2007-08/msg00025.html
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
Virtualbox works on a MAC OSX machine - it is the only freeware one that I know that offers this capability. It is not a "baremetal" hypervisor - rather it runs on an OS. VMware Player is a similar product. I tried VMware Player (freeware) and virtual box. So far the virtual box seems to perform a slight bit better. When I tried to use Xen, I had installation issues and really did not take the time to thoroughly test this product. VMware Fusion will let you run a Windows OS on a MAC without the "bootcamp" issues Parrallels will as well. However Fusion and Parallels will cost you money where virtualbox will not (at this time.) I am curious if anyone out there has performed testing on backup and recovery of these desktop VMs and what the results were. -- View this message in context: http://xen.1045712.n5.nabble.com/Xen-vs-VirtualBox-tp2595024p4341484.html Sent from the Xen - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users