Xen users - Jun 2012 - Which one to use: Xen HV, Xen Cloud Platform, or Citrix XenServer?

With so many different avenues for using Xen I''m wondering which path
to take:

	* Xen Hypervisor (e.g., CentOS 5.x, Debian {4,5,6}, etc),
	* Xen Cloud Platform [XCP], or
	* Citrix XenServer [XS].
Is there one platform that...

	* is more stable?
	* has more features? e.g., live migration, high-availability, etc.

	* tracks Xen HV development more closely?

Is there one Linux distro that...
	* is more stable than the others?

	* tracks Xen HV development more closely? e.g.,RHEL/CentOS 5.x uses Xen 3.0.
Debian 6 uses Xen 4.0 AFAIK.
TIA,
Eric Pretorious
Truckee, CA

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users

With so many different avenues for using Xen I''m wondering which path
to take:

	* Xen Hypervisor (e.g., CentOS 5.x, Debian {4,5,6}, etc),
	* Xen Cloud Platform [XCP], or
	* Citrix XenServer [XS].
Is there one platform that...

	* is more stable?
	* has more features? e.g., live migration, high-availability, etc.

	* tracks Xen HV development more closely?

Is there one Linux distro that...
	* is more stable than the others?

	* tracks Xen HV development more closely?  e.g.,RHEL/CentOS 5.x uses Xen 3.0.
Debian 6 uses Xen 4.0 AFAIK. TIA,
Eric Pretorious
Truckee, CA

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users

On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 6:01 AM, Eric <epretorious@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> With so many different avenues for using Xen I''m wondering which
path to
> take:
>
> Xen Hypervisor (e.g., CentOS 5.x, Debian {4,5,6}, etc),
> Xen Cloud Platform [XCP], or
> Citrix XenServer [XS].
>
> Is there one platform that...
>
> is more stable?
> has more features? e.g., live migration, high-availability, etc.
> tracks Xen HV development more closely?
>
> Is there one Linux distro that...
>
> is more stable than the others?
> tracks Xen HV development more closely? e.g.,RHEL/CentOS 5.x uses Xen 3.0.
> Debian 6 uses Xen 4.0 AFAIK.
If you''ve read the documentations and try some of them, like I
recommended before, you''d probably know the answer already :)

In short, there''s no silver bullet. You can''t have it all. For
now anyway.
It''s your choice whether to pick appliance-type vs distro-installed,
and newer-features vs rock-stable-and-proven.

Going forward, since xapi tools will be available and developed mainly
on debian/ubuntu, those would probably be the best choice. I wouldn''t
hold my breath though, as (from experience) most likely it''d take
several years to get there.

-- 
Fajar

> From: Fajar A. Nugraha <list@fajar.net>
>To: Eric <epretorious@yahoo.com> 
>Cc: "xen-users@lists.xen.org" <xen-users@lists.xen.org> 
>Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 5:27 PM
>Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Which one to use: Xen HV, Xen Cloud Platform, or
Citrix XenServer?
> 
>On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 6:01 AM, Eric <epretorious@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> With so many different avenues for using Xen I''m wondering
which path to
>> take:
>>
>> Xen Hypervisor (e.g., CentOS 5.x, Debian {4,5,6}, etc),
>> Xen Cloud Platform [XCP], or
>> Citrix XenServer [XS].
>>
>> Is there one platform that...
>> is more stable?
>> has more features? e.g., live migration, high-availability, etc.
>> tracks Xen HV development more closely?
>>
>> Is there one Linux distro that...
>>
>> is more stable than the others?
>> tracks Xen HV development more closely? e.g.,RHEL/CentOS 5.x uses Xen
3.0.
>> Debian 6 uses Xen 4.0 AFAIK.
>
>If you''ve read the documentations and try some of them, like I
>recommended before, you''d probably know the answer already :)

1. I''ve read The Documentation but these questions are not adequately
addressed _anywhere_. I''d be happy to read any links that you can
provide that may shed some light on these very-important questions, though.

2. Recommended *before*?

>In short, there''s no silver bullet. You can''t have it all.
For now anyway.
>It''s your choice whether to pick appliance-type vs
distro-installed,
>and newer-features vs rock-stable-and-proven.

Yeah, I know. That''s why I''m asking list members to share
their experience and their perspective.

>Going forward, since xapi tools will be available and developed mainly
>on debian/ubuntu, those would probably be the best choice. I
wouldn''t
>hold my breath though, as (from experience) most likely it''d take
>several years to get there.

Thanks, Fajar. That seems like good advice.

Eric Pretorious
Truckee, CA

I have to agree with Eric here --

I found it really difficult to determine that type of high-level question
when I first got into playing around with Xen, XCP, and XenServer.

Reading through "the docs" doesn''t really give you those
answers.

There''s lot of in-depth information, but not much available that just
explains the basics a sys admin would want to know.

Even now after having played with all 3 for a while, I''m not totally
confident of the answers to the questions raised by the OP:

   - is more stable?
   - has more
features<http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/XCP/XenServer_Feature_Matrix>?
   e.g., live migration, high-availability, etc.
   - tracks Xen HV development more closely?

In particular I can''t speak for Xen vs XCP/XenServer... but I do feel
that
XenServer is more stable than XCP as XCP is derived from the XenServer code
base and then basically I think has the proprietary bits pulled out (is
that right guys?), so overall XenServer certainly must be more stable as it
attracts more of Citrix''s time and effort in testing and certifying the
releases.

I''d be inclined to recommend XenServer to anyone who doesn''t
need anything
more than the free version of XenServer provides.

With that said, we have been using XCP 1.1 on a number of servers here as
well and haven''t had any issues, so I think it''s quite a nice
product.

Check out the comparison matrix here:
http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/XCP/XenServer_Feature_Matrix

Note, neither XCP nor the free XenServer will give you HA. For that you
need the Advanced Xenserver, and HA can be a bit tricky to setup....
it''s
not uber obvious from the online docs either, but HA will only work if you
have identical server hardware that can be setup in a pool and you also
need a shared storage backend (or setup DRBD for shared storage, which
we''ve played with, but I wouldn''t recommend to the faint of
heart or those
who want things to work easily without a lot of messing around).

DRBD reference:
http://www.linbit.com/fileadmin/tech-guides/xenserver-drbd.pdf

I''m going to shortly be playing around with the alternative which is to
do
an active/passive HA DRBD setup using free XenServer and the above guide.

For HA with plain Xen there''s also Remus (http://nss.cs.ubc.ca/remus/),
which I haven''t tried yet, but really would love to hear from others
how
well it works.

Cheers,
Andrew

Andrew Eross
CTO
Locatrix Communications




On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Eric <epretorious@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > From: Fajar A. Nugraha <list@fajar.net>
>
> >To: Eric <epretorious@yahoo.com>
> >Cc: "xen-users@lists.xen.org" <xen-users@lists.xen.org>
> >Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 5:27 PM
> >Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Which one to use: Xen HV, Xen Cloud Platform,
or
> Citrix XenServer?
> >
> >On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 6:01 AM, Eric <epretorious@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> >> With so many different avenues for using Xen I''m
wondering which path to
> >> take:
> >>
> >> Xen Hypervisor (e.g., CentOS 5.x, Debian {4,5,6}, etc),
> >> Xen Cloud Platform [XCP], or
> >> Citrix XenServer [XS].
> >>
> >> Is there one platform that...
> >> is more stable?
> >> has more features? e.g., live migration, high-availability, etc.
> >> tracks Xen HV development more closely?
> >>
> >> Is there one Linux distro that...
> >>
> >> is more stable than the others?
> >> tracks Xen HV development more closely? e.g.,RHEL/CentOS 5.x uses
Xen
> 3.0.
> >> Debian 6 uses Xen 4.0 AFAIK.
> >
> >If you''ve read the documentations and try some of them, like I
> >recommended before, you''d probably know the answer already :)
>
>
> 1. I''ve read The Documentation but these questions are not
adequately
> addressed _anywhere_. I''d be happy to read any links that you can
provide
> that may shed some light on these very-important questions, though.
>
> 2. Recommended *before*?
>
>
> >In short, there''s no silver bullet. You can''t have it
all. For now anyway.
> >It''s your choice whether to pick appliance-type vs
distro-installed,
> >and newer-features vs rock-stable-and-proven.
>
>
> Yeah, I know. That''s why I''m asking list members to share
their experience
> and their perspective.
>
>
> >Going forward, since xapi tools will be available and developed mainly
> >on debian/ubuntu, those would probably be the best choice. I
wouldn''t
> >hold my breath though, as (from experience) most likely it''d
take
> >several years to get there.
>
>
> Thanks, Fajar. That seems like good advice.
>
> Eric Pretorious
> Truckee, CA
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users@lists.xen.org
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
>

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users

On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 1:01 AM, Eric <epretorious@yahoo.com> wrote:
> With so many different avenues for using Xen I''m wondering which
path to
> take:
>
>    - Xen Hypervisor (e.g., CentOS 5.x, Debian {4,5,6},
etc<http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Dom0_Kernels_for_Xen>
>    ),
>    - Xen Cloud Platform
<http://www.xen.org/products/cloudxen.html>[XCP], or
>    - Citrix
XenServer<http://www.citrix.com/English/ps2/products/product.asp?contentID=683148>[XS].
>
> I was in the same situation as you are. Took a close look at XenServer and
on my way to consider XCP but then i stumble upon  Ganeti
http://code.google.com/p/ganeti/).

Ganeti (http://code.google.com/p/ganeti/) is a free (heterogeneous) cluster
virtual server management developed by Google folks. It can use  xen or kvm
as hypervisor and drbd (or shared storage) for disk storage.

For more on ganeti, i found the references below interesting:
  - a video presentation about ganeti:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQc8GcedfEU
  - a rather complete presentation:
http://lancealbertson.com/slides/ganeti-scale9x/#1
  - Ganeti WebManager is a nice GUI frontend:
https://code.osuosl.org/projects/ganeti-webmgr/


Is there one platform that...
>
>    - is more stable?
>
> Ganeti is used internally at Google, Mozilla and others institution
>
>    - has more
features<http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/XCP/XenServer_Feature_Matrix>?
>    e.g., live migration, high-availability, etc.
>
> Ganeti has live migration and many more features.
It lacks  built-in HA as there''s no pacemaker integration or things
like
that.  However , you can easily move all instance (aka VMs)  running on a
node (aka host) to another node  with a single  command. It''s just that
it
won''t happen automatically
>
>    -
>    - tracks Xen HV development more closely?
>
> Works with your standard Xen Hypervisor packaged by your favourite
distribution
>
>    -
>
> Is there one Linux distro that...
>
>    - is more stable than the others?
>
> Use your favorite distro. But FYI, package for debian are made by one of
the dev'' . But folks are running ganeti on top of RedHat, Gentoo...


HTH,
Thanks !


_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users

Thanks for telling me about Remus, Andrew:

Fault-tolerance (FT) on Xen HV/XCP/XS is a topic that I am very curious about
but haven''t had time to delve into.

I''ve set up a two node XenServer pool using XenCenter and have been
impressed with the simplicity of managing XS using XC.

However, while digging a little deeper into the quesion of Debian and the Xen
Hypervisor I discovered that Debian has announced that Debian 7.0 (Wheezy) will
also include XCP (1.3)...

 * http://wiki.debian.org/Xen/

...and now I''m really puzzled (because I thought that XCP was a
complete hypervisor platform [similar to VMware ESXi and Citrix XenServer] that
included a CentOS-based Dom0). I''m also a bit put-off by, what seems
like, the large number of packaging issues related to XAPI in/on Debian. (Is
that a fair assesment, in your opinion?)

I do like that Wheezy will ship with Xen Hypervisor 4.1, though, and I like that
I''ll be able to extend/modify the DomO using the extensive Debian
package library (and/or by installing/compiling software from source [e.g.,
Gluster]).

I haven''t tested XCP yet though and I''m wondering what
others'' experience has been with Debian+Xen?

Eric Pretorious
Truckee, CA


>________________________________
> From: Andrew Eross <eross@locatrix.com>
>To: Eric <epretorious@yahoo.com> 
>Cc: "xen-users@lists.xen.org" <xen-users@lists.xen.org>;
Fajar A. Nugraha <list@fajar.net>
>Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 6:37 PM
>Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Which one to use: Xen HV, Xen Cloud Platform, or
Citrix XenServer?
> 
>
>I have to agree with Eric here --
>
>
>I found it really difficult to determine that type of high-level question
when I first got into playing around with Xen, XCP, and XenServer. 
>
>
>Reading through "the docs" doesn''t really give you those
answers.
>
>
>There''s lot of in-depth information, but not much available that
just explains the basics a sys admin would want to know.
>
>
>Even now after having played with all 3 for a while, I''m not
totally confident of the answers to the questions raised by the OP:
>	* is more stable?
>	* has more features? e.g., live migration, high-availability, etc.
>
>	* tracks Xen HV development more closely?
>In particular I can''t speak for Xen vs XCP/XenServer... but I do
feel that XenServer is more stable than XCP as XCP is derived from the XenServer
code base and then basically I think has the proprietary bits pulled out (is
that right guys?), so overall XenServer certainly must be more stable as it
attracts more of Citrix''s time and effort in testing and certifying the
releases.
>
>
>I''d be inclined to recommend XenServer to anyone who
doesn''t need anything more than the free version of XenServer
provides. 
>
>
>With that said, we have been using XCP 1.1 on a number of servers here as
well and haven''t had any issues, so I think it''s quite a nice
product.
>
>
>Check out the comparison matrix here:
>http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/XCP/XenServer_Feature_Matrix
>
>
>Note, neither XCP nor the free XenServer will give you HA. For that you need
the Advanced Xenserver, and HA can be a bit tricky to setup.... it''s
not uber obvious from the online docs either, but HA will only work if you have
identical server hardware that can be setup in a pool and you also need a shared
storage backend (or setup DRBD for shared storage, which we''ve played
with, but I wouldn''t recommend to the faint of heart or those who want
things to work easily without a lot of messing around).
>
>
>DRBD
reference: http://www.linbit.com/fileadmin/tech-guides/xenserver-drbd.pdf
>
>
>I''m going to shortly be playing around with the alternative which
is to do an active/passive HA DRBD setup using free XenServer and the above
guide.
>
>
>For HA with plain Xen there''s also Remus
(http://nss.cs.ubc.ca/remus/), which I haven''t tried yet, but really
would love to hear from others how well it works.
>
>
>Cheers,
>Andrew
>
>
>Andrew Eross
>CTO
>Locatrix Communications
>
>
>
>
>
>On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Eric <epretorious@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Fajar A. Nugraha <list@fajar.net>
>>
>>>To: Eric <epretorious@yahoo.com>
>>>Cc: "xen-users@lists.xen.org"
<xen-users@lists.xen.org>
>>>Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 5:27 PM
>>>Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Which one to use: Xen HV, Xen Cloud
Platform, or Citrix XenServer?
>>
>>>
>>>On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 6:01 AM, Eric <epretorious@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>>>> With so many different avenues for using Xen I''m
wondering which path to
>>>> take:
>>>>
>>>> Xen Hypervisor (e.g., CentOS 5.x, Debian {4,5,6}, etc),
>>>> Xen Cloud Platform [XCP], or
>>>> Citrix XenServer [XS].
>>>>
>>>> Is there one platform that...
>>>> is more stable?
>>>> has more features? e.g., live migration, high-availability,
etc.
>>>> tracks Xen HV development more closely?
>>>>
>>>> Is there one Linux distro that...
>>>>
>>>> is more stable than the others?
>>>> tracks Xen HV development more closely? e.g.,RHEL/CentOS 5.x
uses Xen 3.0.
>>>> Debian 6 uses Xen 4.0 AFAIK.
>>>
>>>If you''ve read the documentations and try some of them,
like I
>>>recommended before, you''d probably know the answer already
:)
>>
>>
>>1. I''ve read The Documentation but these questions are not
adequately addressed _anywhere_. I''d be happy to read any links that
you can provide that may shed some light on these very-important questions,
though.
>>
>>2. Recommended *before*?
>>
>>
>>
>>>In short, there''s no silver bullet. You can''t have
it all. For now anyway.
>>>It''s your choice whether to pick appliance-type vs
distro-installed,
>>>and newer-features vs rock-stable-and-proven.
>>
>>
>>Yeah, I know. That''s why I''m asking list members to
share their experience and their perspective.
>>
>>
>>
>>>Going forward, since xapi tools will be available and developed
mainly
>>>on debian/ubuntu, those would probably be the best choice. I
wouldn''t
>>>hold my breath though, as (from experience) most likely
it''d take
>>>several years to get there.
>>
>>
>>Thanks, Fajar. That seems like good advice.
>>
>>Eric Pretorious
>>Truckee, CA
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Xen-users mailing list
>>Xen-users@lists.xen.org
>>http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Xen-users mailing list
>Xen-users@lists.xen.org
>http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
>
>
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users

Hiya Eric,

Yep, pooling is very cool, although it requires identical hardware to work,
so for a lot of my experiments involving spare heterogeneous hardware, it
hasn''t been so useful to me. Also running HA on a pool requires a
XenServer
advanced license (which I must say is reasonably priced, and Citrix
certainly deserves support), and also only really works well out-of-the-box
with a real shared storage device. Without a shared storage device, I did
get HA working on an active/active DRBD setup with XS Advanced, but found
it was prone to split brains and just wasn''t quite stable enough that
I''d
trust it with our database VM. My current side project is creating an
active/hot standby HA VM using DRBD in active/passive, pacemaker, and XS,
which is working really well so far in initial tests with 2 normal XSs and
local disks.

So about that XCP Debian thing.. really all that means is it''s like you
can
build your own XCP with Debian as the dom0 instead of CentOS.

Read this: http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Project_Kronos

XCP (and XenServer which is the same thing, just not open source) is a
complete package of a dom0 OS + Xen + XenAPI + other useful stuff.. the
idea behind it is that it''s a simple bare-metal installable ISO that
saves
you the trouble of installing your own Linux with all the right packages.
It''s been tested and will work when installed. This is comparable to
ESXi,
which is using the VMware hypervisor down underneath all of that management
stuff, and it''s all packaged up into a nice ISO.

So now for Debian for those who want to use XCP, but really want Debian
instead of CentOS as the dom0.. they''re saying you can install it all
yourself if you like and use Debian as the base. To me that just sounds
like a way to introduce a lot of variables and complexity into the install
and neatly avoid all the advantages of a tested working pre-packaged
system... e.g. not something I''d go install into production without
having
very carefully tested every part myself first in the lab...only worth it if
you need it.

One important thing to understand is that all of these things are using Xen
at the bottom, which is the actual Hypervisor. XCP and XenServer are
running their VMs on Xen.

e.g. check this: http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/Xen_/_XCP_/_XCP_on_Linux_Overview

When people are talking about XCP like that ("install the XCP
package"),
mostly what they''re talking about is installing XenAPI along with Xen.
XenAPI is the API that XenCenter (for example) is using to contact your
XCP/XenServer host and do stuff like "get all VMs", "start
VM", etc. It''s
just an API abstraction for managing Xen.

IMHO I think that terminology is confusing and the XCP label should be
reserved for reference exclusively to the official installable ISO packaged
version, but it''s all evolving... and in the above case I think
they''re
using XCP more like a label for any system that''s using the same group
of
packages (e.g. Xen + XenAPI, etc).

Production is best run on stable software... to me that means I''d stick
with XenServer today (free edition is a great start), and in the future
possibly XCP or your own rolled up version of Xen/XenAPI packages if you
have a more complex architecture that needs it.

I haven''t used Debian + Xen myself, so will have to defer to others
there.

Cheers,
Andrew


On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 3:30 AM, Eric <epretorious@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Thanks for telling me about Remus, Andrew:
>
> Fault-tolerance (FT) on Xen HV/XCP/XS is a topic that I am very curious
> about but haven''t had time to delve into.
>
> I''ve set up a two node XenServer pool using XenCenter and have
been
> impressed with the simplicity of managing XS using XC.
>
> However, while digging a little deeper into the quesion of Debian and the
> Xen Hypervisor I discovered that Debian has announced that Debian 7.0
> (Wheezy) will also include XCP (1.3)...
>
>  * http://wiki.debian.org/Xen/
>
> ...and now I''m really puzzled (because I thought that XCP was a
complete
> hypervisor platform [similar to VMware ESXi and Citrix XenServer] that
> included a CentOS-based Dom0). I''m also a bit put-off by, what
seems like,
> the large number of packaging issues related to XAPI in/on Debian. (Is that
> a fair assesment, in your opinion?)
>
> I do like that Wheezy will ship with Xen Hypervisor 4.1, though, and I
> like that I''ll be able to extend/modify the DomO using the
extensive Debian
> package library (and/or by installing/compiling software from source [e.g.,
> Gluster]).
>
> I haven''t tested XCP yet though and I''m wondering what
others'' experience
> has been with Debian+Xen?
>
> Eric Pretorious
> Truckee, CA
>
>   ------------------------------
> *From:* Andrew Eross <eross@locatrix.com>
> *To:* Eric <epretorious@yahoo.com>
> *Cc:* "xen-users@lists.xen.org" <xen-users@lists.xen.org>;
Fajar A.
> Nugraha <list@fajar.net>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 27, 2012 6:37 PM
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Xen-users] Which one to use: Xen HV, Xen Cloud Platform,
> or Citrix XenServer?
>
> I have to agree with Eric here --
>
> I found it really difficult to determine that type of high-level question
> when I first got into playing around with Xen, XCP, and XenServer.
>
> Reading through "the docs" doesn''t really give you those
answers.
>
> There''s lot of in-depth information, but not much available that
just
> explains the basics a sys admin would want to know.
>
> Even now after having played with all 3 for a while, I''m not
totally
> confident of the answers to the questions raised by the OP:
>
>    - is more stable?
>    - has more
features<http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/XCP/XenServer_Feature_Matrix>?
>    e.g., live migration, high-availability, etc.
>    - tracks Xen HV development more closely?
>
> In particular I can''t speak for Xen vs XCP/XenServer... but I do
feel that
> XenServer is more stable than XCP as XCP is derived from the XenServer code
> base and then basically I think has the proprietary bits pulled out (is
> that right guys?), so overall XenServer certainly must be more stable as it
> attracts more of Citrix''s time and effort in testing and
certifying the
> releases.
>
> I''d be inclined to recommend XenServer to anyone who
doesn''t need anything
> more than the free version of XenServer provides.
>
> With that said, we have been using XCP 1.1 on a number of servers here as
> well and haven''t had any issues, so I think it''s quite a
nice product.
>
> Check out the comparison matrix here:
> http://wiki.xen.org/wiki/XCP/XenServer_Feature_Matrix
>
> Note, neither XCP nor the free XenServer will give you HA. For that you
> need the Advanced Xenserver, and HA can be a bit tricky to setup....
it''s
> not uber obvious from the online docs either, but HA will only work if you
> have identical server hardware that can be setup in a pool and you also
> need a shared storage backend (or setup DRBD for shared storage, which
> we''ve played with, but I wouldn''t recommend to the faint
of heart or those
> who want things to work easily without a lot of messing around).
>
> DRBD reference:
> http://www.linbit.com/fileadmin/tech-guides/xenserver-drbd.pdf
>
> I''m going to shortly be playing around with the alternative which
is to do
> an active/passive HA DRBD setup using free XenServer and the above guide.
>
> For HA with plain Xen there''s also Remus
(http://nss.cs.ubc.ca/remus/),
> which I haven''t tried yet, but really would love to hear from
others how
> well it works.
>
> Cheers,
> Andrew
>
> Andrew Eross
> CTO
> Locatrix Communications
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Eric <epretorious@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Fajar A. Nugraha <list@fajar.net>
>
> >To: Eric <epretorious@yahoo.com>
> >Cc: "xen-users@lists.xen.org" <xen-users@lists.xen.org>
> >Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2012 5:27 PM
> >Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Which one to use: Xen HV, Xen Cloud Platform,
or
> Citrix XenServer?
> >
> >On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 6:01 AM, Eric <epretorious@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> >> With so many different avenues for using Xen I''m
wondering which path to
> >> take:
> >>
> >> Xen Hypervisor (e.g., CentOS 5.x, Debian {4,5,6}, etc),
> >> Xen Cloud Platform [XCP], or
> >> Citrix XenServer [XS].
> >>
> >> Is there one platform that...
> >> is more stable?
> >> has more features? e.g., live migration, high-availability, etc.
> >> tracks Xen HV development more closely?
> >>
> >> Is there one Linux distro that...
> >>
> >> is more stable than the others?
> >> tracks Xen HV development more closely? e.g.,RHEL/CentOS 5.x uses
Xen
> 3.0.
> >> Debian 6 uses Xen 4.0 AFAIK.
> >
> >If you''ve read the documentations and try some of them, like I
> >recommended before, you''d probably know the answer already :)
>
>
> 1. I''ve read The Documentation but these questions are not
adequately
> addressed _anywhere_. I''d be happy to read any links that you can
provide
> that may shed some light on these very-important questions, though.
>
> 2. Recommended *before*?
>
>
> >In short, there''s no silver bullet. You can''t have it
all. For now anyway.
> >It''s your choice whether to pick appliance-type vs
distro-installed,
> >and newer-features vs rock-stable-and-proven.
>
>
> Yeah, I know. That''s why I''m asking list members to share
their experience
> and their perspective.
>
>
> >Going forward, since xapi tools will be available and developed mainly
> >on debian/ubuntu, those would probably be the best choice. I
wouldn''t
> >hold my breath though, as (from experience) most likely it''d
take
> >several years to get there.
>
>
> Thanks, Fajar. That seems like good advice.
>
> Eric Pretorious
> Truckee, CA
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users@lists.xen.org
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users@lists.xen.org
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-users
>
>

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-users