Re: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host
On 06-20 18:00, Guillaume Seigneuret wrote: > Could you tell us what did you do to test the stability ? > Softs running on it, who many time and with who many users using it ? > > Thanks by advance. > I'm testing often PV on Xen 3.2. It crashes once an hour. :( -- Witold Baryluk JID: witold.baryluk // jabster.pl signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host
Yeah... as I've said, i used HVM and i only spoke about my expierience with that :) So no PVM... tjado Am 21.06.2010 02:14, schrieb Adrian Chadd: > As I've said before, the FreeBSD-Xen PVM code requires someone with > the time and inclination to pick it up and maintain it. The commercial > focus of FreeBSD/Xen users at the moment seems to be on HVM support > rather than full PVM support. > > > > Adrian > > On 21 June 2010 01:07, Tjado Mäcke wrote: > >> I didn't do any tests in general. I used for a while FreeBSD HVM (and >> other os guests...) under xen-3.2.1. There I got problems that VM's >> react very slowly under ZFS/UFS I/O stress (tar of logs, etc...) till I >> need to reboot the guest. It was under FreeBSD 7.2 with ZFS beta but 8.0 >> didn't worked with that xen/kernel. The last weeks I tried Xen 4.0.0 but >> tap:aio and tap:tapdisk:aio cause complete host kernel crashes under I/O >> stress (dd if /dev/zero...). With Xen-4.0.1-rc3-pre I haven't these >> problems, FreeBSD 8 is working (so booting works ;) and states/times >> seems a lot more healthier. >> >> Softs: Webserver with a top 5000 (alexa) site (high db access - cached, >> some I/O because of downloads), high threaded game server (for wc3), >> mail server and other webservers/stuff... >> >> Am 20.06.2010 18:00, schrieb Guillaume Seigneuret: >> >>> Could you tell us what did you do to test the stability ? >>> Softs running on it, who many time and with who many users using it ? >>> >>> Thanks by advance. >>> >>> Cordialement, >>> >>> Guillaume Seigneuret >>> >>> >>> >>> Network and System Security Architect >>> Web : http://www.omegacube.fr >>> Address : >>> Hôtel Technologique - BP 100 >>> Technopôle de Château Gombert >>> 13382 Marseille Cedex 13 >>> >>> >>> ___ freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host
As I've said before, the FreeBSD-Xen PVM code requires someone with the time and inclination to pick it up and maintain it. The commercial focus of FreeBSD/Xen users at the moment seems to be on HVM support rather than full PVM support. Adrian On 21 June 2010 01:07, Tjado Mäcke wrote: > I didn't do any tests in general. I used for a while FreeBSD HVM (and > other os guests...) under xen-3.2.1. There I got problems that VM's > react very slowly under ZFS/UFS I/O stress (tar of logs, etc...) till I > need to reboot the guest. It was under FreeBSD 7.2 with ZFS beta but 8.0 > didn't worked with that xen/kernel. The last weeks I tried Xen 4.0.0 but > tap:aio and tap:tapdisk:aio cause complete host kernel crashes under I/O > stress (dd if /dev/zero...). With Xen-4.0.1-rc3-pre I haven't these > problems, FreeBSD 8 is working (so booting works ;) and states/times > seems a lot more healthier. > > Softs: Webserver with a top 5000 (alexa) site (high db access - cached, > some I/O because of downloads), high threaded game server (for wc3), > mail server and other webservers/stuff... > > Am 20.06.2010 18:00, schrieb Guillaume Seigneuret: >> Could you tell us what did you do to test the stability ? >> Softs running on it, who many time and with who many users using it ? >> >> Thanks by advance. >> >> Cordialement, >> >> Guillaume Seigneuret >> >> >> >> Network and System Security Architect >> Web : http://www.omegacube.fr >> Address : >> Hôtel Technologique - BP 100 >> Technopôle de Château Gombert >> 13382 Marseille Cedex 13 >> >> >> -Message d'origine----- >> De : Tjado Mäcke [mailto:tjado.ml.freebsd-...@maecke.net] >> Envoyé : dimanche 20 juin 2010 17:57 >> À : Guillaume Seigneuret >> Cc : 'Pandu Poluan'; freebsd-xen@freebsd.org >> Objet : Re: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host >> >> I mean stable in a general way not for FreeBSD (didn't tried out it in >> PV yet). >> >> tjado >> >> Am 20.06.2010 17:54, schrieb Guillaume Seigneuret: >> >>> I did try with Xen 4.0.0. >>> But more stable doesn't meens "suitable for production use" ... >>> I think the FreeBSD team has to work on its kernel to make it stable under >>> paravirtualized environment. >>> It's not really a question of Xen kernel version. >>> >>> Cordialement, >>> >>> Guillaume Seigneuret >>> >>> >>> >>> Network and System Security Architect >>> Web : http://www.omegacube.fr >>> Address : >>> Hôtel Technologique - BP 100 >>> Technopôle de Château Gombert >>> 13382 Marseille Cedex 13 >>> >>> -Message d'origine- >>> De : Tjado Mäcke [mailto:tjado.ml.freebsd-...@maecke.net] >>> Envoyé : dimanche 20 juin 2010 16:28 >>> À : Guillaume Seigneuret >>> Cc : Pandu Poluan; freebsd-xen@freebsd.org >>> Objet : Re: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> which version did you use of 4.0? For me, 4.0.1-rc3-pre runs more stable >>> than 4.0.0. >>> Do you have some more information about the FreeBSD pv? Maybe i will try >>> this howto: http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=10268 >>> >>> tjado >>> >>> Am 20.06.2010 12:00, schrieb Guillaume Seigneuret: >>> >>> >>>> You're welcome, yes I guess it's safer to keep them in standalone servers >>>> for the moment. >>>> For information I did try : >>>> >>>> FreeBSD 8 i386 paravirtualized on : >>>> >>>> - Xen 3.4.2 with a 2.6.32 Linux kernel >>>> - Xen 4.0 with a 2.6.32.12 Linux kernel >>>> >>>> FreeBSD 9 beta i386 paravirtualized on : >>>> >>>> - >>>> - Xen 3.4.2 with a 2.6.32 Linux kernel >>>> - Xen 4.0 with a 2.6.32.12 Linux kerne >>>> >>>> >>>> Configuration with mono CPU and 512/1024 Mo RAM, Disks on Dom0 LVM >>>> partitions. >>>> Plateforms : Dell T610, Dell R200, Dell R210. >>>> >>>> Cordialement, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > ___ > freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > ___ freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host
I didn't do any tests in general. I used for a while FreeBSD HVM (and other os guests...) under xen-3.2.1. There I got problems that VM's react very slowly under ZFS/UFS I/O stress (tar of logs, etc...) till I need to reboot the guest. It was under FreeBSD 7.2 with ZFS beta but 8.0 didn't worked with that xen/kernel. The last weeks I tried Xen 4.0.0 but tap:aio and tap:tapdisk:aio cause complete host kernel crashes under I/O stress (dd if /dev/zero...). With Xen-4.0.1-rc3-pre I haven't these problems, FreeBSD 8 is working (so booting works ;) and states/times seems a lot more healthier. Softs: Webserver with a top 5000 (alexa) site (high db access - cached, some I/O because of downloads), high threaded game server (for wc3), mail server and other webservers/stuff... Am 20.06.2010 18:00, schrieb Guillaume Seigneuret: > Could you tell us what did you do to test the stability ? > Softs running on it, who many time and with who many users using it ? > > Thanks by advance. > > Cordialement, > > Guillaume Seigneuret > > > > Network and System Security Architect > Web : http://www.omegacube.fr > Address : > Hôtel Technologique - BP 100 > Technopôle de Château Gombert > 13382 Marseille Cedex 13 > > > -Message d'origine- > De : Tjado Mäcke [mailto:tjado.ml.freebsd-...@maecke.net] > Envoyé : dimanche 20 juin 2010 17:57 > À : Guillaume Seigneuret > Cc : 'Pandu Poluan'; freebsd-xen@freebsd.org > Objet : Re: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host > > I mean stable in a general way not for FreeBSD (didn't tried out it in > PV yet). > > tjado > > Am 20.06.2010 17:54, schrieb Guillaume Seigneuret: > >> I did try with Xen 4.0.0. >> But more stable doesn't meens "suitable for production use" ... >> I think the FreeBSD team has to work on its kernel to make it stable under >> paravirtualized environment. >> It's not really a question of Xen kernel version. >> >> Cordialement, >> >> Guillaume Seigneuret >> >> >> >> Network and System Security Architect >> Web : http://www.omegacube.fr >> Address : >> Hôtel Technologique - BP 100 >> Technopôle de Château Gombert >> 13382 Marseille Cedex 13 >> >> -Message d'origine- >> De : Tjado Mäcke [mailto:tjado.ml.freebsd-...@maecke.net] >> Envoyé : dimanche 20 juin 2010 16:28 >> À : Guillaume Seigneuret >> Cc : Pandu Poluan; freebsd-xen@freebsd.org >> Objet : Re: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host >> >> Hi, >> >> which version did you use of 4.0? For me, 4.0.1-rc3-pre runs more stable >> than 4.0.0. >> Do you have some more information about the FreeBSD pv? Maybe i will try >> this howto: http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=10268 >> >> tjado >> >> Am 20.06.2010 12:00, schrieb Guillaume Seigneuret: >> >> >>> You're welcome, yes I guess it's safer to keep them in standalone servers >>> for the moment. >>> For information I did try : >>> >>> FreeBSD 8 i386 paravirtualized on : >>> >>>- Xen 3.4.2 with a 2.6.32 Linux kernel >>>- Xen 4.0 with a 2.6.32.12 Linux kernel >>> >>> FreeBSD 9 beta i386 paravirtualized on : >>> >>>- >>>- Xen 3.4.2 with a 2.6.32 Linux kernel >>>- Xen 4.0 with a 2.6.32.12 Linux kerne >>> >>> >>> Configuration with mono CPU and 512/1024 Mo RAM, Disks on Dom0 LVM >>> partitions. >>> Plateforms : Dell T610, Dell R200, Dell R210. >>> >>> Cordialement, >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > ___ freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host
Could you tell us what did you do to test the stability ? Softs running on it, who many time and with who many users using it ? Thanks by advance. Cordialement, Guillaume Seigneuret Network and System Security Architect Web : http://www.omegacube.fr Address : Hôtel Technologique - BP 100 Technopôle de Château Gombert 13382 Marseille Cedex 13 -Message d'origine- De : Tjado Mäcke [mailto:tjado.ml.freebsd-...@maecke.net] Envoyé : dimanche 20 juin 2010 17:57 À : Guillaume Seigneuret Cc : 'Pandu Poluan'; freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Objet : Re: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host I mean stable in a general way not for FreeBSD (didn't tried out it in PV yet). tjado Am 20.06.2010 17:54, schrieb Guillaume Seigneuret: > I did try with Xen 4.0.0. > But more stable doesn't meens "suitable for production use" ... > I think the FreeBSD team has to work on its kernel to make it stable under > paravirtualized environment. > It's not really a question of Xen kernel version. > > Cordialement, > > Guillaume Seigneuret > > > > Network and System Security Architect > Web : http://www.omegacube.fr > Address : > Hôtel Technologique - BP 100 > Technopôle de Château Gombert > 13382 Marseille Cedex 13 > > -Message d'origine- > De : Tjado Mäcke [mailto:tjado.ml.freebsd-...@maecke.net] > Envoyé : dimanche 20 juin 2010 16:28 > À : Guillaume Seigneuret > Cc : Pandu Poluan; freebsd-xen@freebsd.org > Objet : Re: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host > > Hi, > > which version did you use of 4.0? For me, 4.0.1-rc3-pre runs more stable > than 4.0.0. > Do you have some more information about the FreeBSD pv? Maybe i will try > this howto: http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=10268 > > tjado > > Am 20.06.2010 12:00, schrieb Guillaume Seigneuret: > >> You're welcome, yes I guess it's safer to keep them in standalone servers >> for the moment. >> For information I did try : >> >> FreeBSD 8 i386 paravirtualized on : >> >>- Xen 3.4.2 with a 2.6.32 Linux kernel >>- Xen 4.0 with a 2.6.32.12 Linux kernel >> >> FreeBSD 9 beta i386 paravirtualized on : >> >>- >>- Xen 3.4.2 with a 2.6.32 Linux kernel >>- Xen 4.0 with a 2.6.32.12 Linux kerne >> >> >> Configuration with mono CPU and 512/1024 Mo RAM, Disks on Dom0 LVM >> partitions. >> Plateforms : Dell T610, Dell R200, Dell R210. >> >> Cordialement, >> >> >> > > ___ freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host
I mean stable in a general way not for FreeBSD (didn't tried out it in PV yet). tjado Am 20.06.2010 17:54, schrieb Guillaume Seigneuret: > I did try with Xen 4.0.0. > But more stable doesn't meens "suitable for production use" ... > I think the FreeBSD team has to work on its kernel to make it stable under > paravirtualized environment. > It's not really a question of Xen kernel version. > > Cordialement, > > Guillaume Seigneuret > > > > Network and System Security Architect > Web : http://www.omegacube.fr > Address : > Hôtel Technologique - BP 100 > Technopôle de Château Gombert > 13382 Marseille Cedex 13 > > -Message d'origine- > De : Tjado Mäcke [mailto:tjado.ml.freebsd-...@maecke.net] > Envoyé : dimanche 20 juin 2010 16:28 > À : Guillaume Seigneuret > Cc : Pandu Poluan; freebsd-xen@freebsd.org > Objet : Re: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host > > Hi, > > which version did you use of 4.0? For me, 4.0.1-rc3-pre runs more stable > than 4.0.0. > Do you have some more information about the FreeBSD pv? Maybe i will try > this howto: http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=10268 > > tjado > > Am 20.06.2010 12:00, schrieb Guillaume Seigneuret: > >> You're welcome, yes I guess it's safer to keep them in standalone servers >> for the moment. >> For information I did try : >> >> FreeBSD 8 i386 paravirtualized on : >> >>- Xen 3.4.2 with a 2.6.32 Linux kernel >>- Xen 4.0 with a 2.6.32.12 Linux kernel >> >> FreeBSD 9 beta i386 paravirtualized on : >> >>- >>- Xen 3.4.2 with a 2.6.32 Linux kernel >>- Xen 4.0 with a 2.6.32.12 Linux kerne >> >> >> Configuration with mono CPU and 512/1024 Mo RAM, Disks on Dom0 LVM >> partitions. >> Plateforms : Dell T610, Dell R200, Dell R210. >> >> Cordialement, >> >> >> > > ___ freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host
I did try with Xen 4.0.0. But more stable doesn't meens "suitable for production use" ... I think the FreeBSD team has to work on its kernel to make it stable under paravirtualized environment. It's not really a question of Xen kernel version. Cordialement, Guillaume Seigneuret Network and System Security Architect Web : http://www.omegacube.fr Address : Hôtel Technologique - BP 100 Technopôle de Château Gombert 13382 Marseille Cedex 13 -Message d'origine- De : Tjado Mäcke [mailto:tjado.ml.freebsd-...@maecke.net] Envoyé : dimanche 20 juin 2010 16:28 À : Guillaume Seigneuret Cc : Pandu Poluan; freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Objet : Re: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host Hi, which version did you use of 4.0? For me, 4.0.1-rc3-pre runs more stable than 4.0.0. Do you have some more information about the FreeBSD pv? Maybe i will try this howto: http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=10268 tjado Am 20.06.2010 12:00, schrieb Guillaume Seigneuret: > You're welcome, yes I guess it's safer to keep them in standalone servers > for the moment. > For information I did try : > > FreeBSD 8 i386 paravirtualized on : > >- Xen 3.4.2 with a 2.6.32 Linux kernel >- Xen 4.0 with a 2.6.32.12 Linux kernel > > FreeBSD 9 beta i386 paravirtualized on : > >- >- Xen 3.4.2 with a 2.6.32 Linux kernel >- Xen 4.0 with a 2.6.32.12 Linux kerne > > > Configuration with mono CPU and 512/1024 Mo RAM, Disks on Dom0 LVM > partitions. > Plateforms : Dell T610, Dell R200, Dell R210. > > Cordialement, > > ___ freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host
Hi, which version did you use of 4.0? For me, 4.0.1-rc3-pre runs more stable than 4.0.0. Do you have some more information about the FreeBSD pv? Maybe i will try this howto: http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=10268 tjado Am 20.06.2010 12:00, schrieb Guillaume Seigneuret: > You're welcome, yes I guess it's safer to keep them in standalone servers > for the moment. > For information I did try : > > FreeBSD 8 i386 paravirtualized on : > >- Xen 3.4.2 with a 2.6.32 Linux kernel >- Xen 4.0 with a 2.6.32.12 Linux kernel > > FreeBSD 9 beta i386 paravirtualized on : > >- >- Xen 3.4.2 with a 2.6.32 Linux kernel >- Xen 4.0 with a 2.6.32.12 Linux kerne > > > Configuration with mono CPU and 512/1024 Mo RAM, Disks on Dom0 LVM > partitions. > Plateforms : Dell T610, Dell R200, Dell R210. > > Cordialement, > > ___ freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host
You're welcome, yes I guess it's safer to keep them in standalone servers for the moment. For information I did try : FreeBSD 8 i386 paravirtualized on : - Xen 3.4.2 with a 2.6.32 Linux kernel - Xen 4.0 with a 2.6.32.12 Linux kernel FreeBSD 9 beta i386 paravirtualized on : - - Xen 3.4.2 with a 2.6.32 Linux kernel - Xen 4.0 with a 2.6.32.12 Linux kerne Configuration with mono CPU and 512/1024 Mo RAM, Disks on Dom0 LVM partitions. Plateforms : Dell T610, Dell R200, Dell R210. Cordialement, ω³ Omega Cube Guillaume S. Network and System Security Architect Web : http://www.omegacube.fr Address : Hôtel Technologique - BP 100 Technopôle de Château Gombert 13382 Marseille Cedex 13 2010/6/20 Pandu Poluan > Ahh... Thanks for the answer. I guess we will keep the > performance-bound FreeBSD servers standalone then. > > Rgds, > > On 2010-06-19, Guillaume Seigneuret wrote: > > As far as I could try, FreeBSD 8 paravitualized is not suitable for > > production use. > > It crashes under stress. > > > > Cordialement, > > > > Guillaume Seigneuret > > > > > > > > Network and System Security Architect > > Web : http://www.omegacube.fr > > Address : > > Hôtel Technologique - BP 100 > > Technopôle de Château Gombert > > 13382 Marseille Cedex 13 > > > > > > -Message d'origine- > > De : owner-freebsd-...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-...@freebsd.org] > De > > la part de Pandu Poluan > > Envoyé : samedi 19 juin 2010 07:53 > > À : freebsd-xen@freebsd.org > > Objet : Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host > > > > Hello all, > > > > I'm just trying to confirm: Is it true that FreeBSD 8's support for > > Paravirtualized Guest on XenServer still experimental/beta? > > > > Because we need to make sure that FreeBSD-based *production* servers > > can be paravirtualized on the xenserver hosts -- performance reasons. > > > > That said, I've tried installing FreeBSD 8 in HVM mode, seems to work > > okay -- might be suitable for the 1 or 2 servers that does not need > > highest performance. > > > > PS: I'm not really familiar with FreeBSD, though I am familiar with > > Linux. Some hand-holding will be appreciated :-) > > > > Rgds, > > -- > > Pandu E Poluan - IT Optimizer > > My website: http://pandu.poluan.info/ > > ___ > > freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > > > > > > -- > Sent from my mobile device > > -- > Pandu E Poluan - IT Optimizer > My website: http://pandu.poluan.info/ > ___ > freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > ___ freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host
Ahh... Thanks for the answer. I guess we will keep the performance-bound FreeBSD servers standalone then. Rgds, On 2010-06-19, Guillaume Seigneuret wrote: > As far as I could try, FreeBSD 8 paravitualized is not suitable for > production use. > It crashes under stress. > > Cordialement, > > Guillaume Seigneuret > > > > Network and System Security Architect > Web : http://www.omegacube.fr > Address : > Hôtel Technologique - BP 100 > Technopôle de Château Gombert > 13382 Marseille Cedex 13 > > > -Message d'origine- > De : owner-freebsd-...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-...@freebsd.org] De > la part de Pandu Poluan > Envoyé : samedi 19 juin 2010 07:53 > À : freebsd-xen@freebsd.org > Objet : Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host > > Hello all, > > I'm just trying to confirm: Is it true that FreeBSD 8's support for > Paravirtualized Guest on XenServer still experimental/beta? > > Because we need to make sure that FreeBSD-based *production* servers > can be paravirtualized on the xenserver hosts -- performance reasons. > > That said, I've tried installing FreeBSD 8 in HVM mode, seems to work > okay -- might be suitable for the 1 or 2 servers that does not need > highest performance. > > PS: I'm not really familiar with FreeBSD, though I am familiar with > Linux. Some hand-holding will be appreciated :-) > > Rgds, > -- > Pandu E Poluan - IT Optimizer > My website: http://pandu.poluan.info/ > ___ > freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > > -- Sent from my mobile device -- Pandu E Poluan - IT Optimizer My website: http://pandu.poluan.info/ ___ freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
RE: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host
As far as I could try, FreeBSD 8 paravitualized is not suitable for production use. It crashes under stress. Cordialement, Guillaume Seigneuret Network and System Security Architect Web : http://www.omegacube.fr Address : Hôtel Technologique - BP 100 Technopôle de Château Gombert 13382 Marseille Cedex 13 -Message d'origine- De : owner-freebsd-...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-...@freebsd.org] De la part de Pandu Poluan Envoyé : samedi 19 juin 2010 07:53 À : freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Objet : Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host Hello all, I'm just trying to confirm: Is it true that FreeBSD 8's support for Paravirtualized Guest on XenServer still experimental/beta? Because we need to make sure that FreeBSD-based *production* servers can be paravirtualized on the xenserver hosts -- performance reasons. That said, I've tried installing FreeBSD 8 in HVM mode, seems to work okay -- might be suitable for the 1 or 2 servers that does not need highest performance. PS: I'm not really familiar with FreeBSD, though I am familiar with Linux. Some hand-holding will be appreciated :-) Rgds, -- Pandu E Poluan - IT Optimizer My website: http://pandu.poluan.info/ ___ freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-xen@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xen To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xen-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
