On 09/09/13 14:06, Eggert, Lars wrote:
> thanks, let me try your suggestion/patch.
> On Sep 9, 2013, at 13:53, Roger Pau Monné <roger....@citrix.com> wrote:
>> May I ask if there's anything that prevents you from switching to the
>> PVHVM port? I wouldn't recommend using the i386 PV port.
> I was thinking that performance would be better, and resource requirements
> lower. If that's not the case, I can certainly go the PVHVM route.
Performance will probably be better on most workloads with PVHVM if you
have HAP (Intel's Extended Page Table or AMD's Nested Page Tables). And
also, i386 PV port is limited to only one vcpu, while PVHVM will allow
you to use as many vcpus as you want.
PVHVM certainly has a higher resource requirement because it requires
you to have a Qemu instance for each running VM, but that process is
going to be idle most of the time (Qemu is mainly needed for booting).
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"