On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 1:16 PM, Humberto Ramirez <[email protected]> wrote:
> The reasoning behind bhyve's inclusion in SmartOS might be obvious for > some of you guys but it's not completely clear to me I would have assume > that simply put it's technically superior to KVM is there more to it? > > I'm new here and the decision predates my arrival. I'm not steeped in Joyent's success and/or lack thereof with KVM. I can offer little more than the following on this topic: We are in need of a hypervisor that has characteristics that are different than what we have in KVM. As you can see from RFD 114, we are pursuing a GPGPU offering . Coupled with this, we need much better networking performance than what we currently have with KVM. On FreeBSD, bhyve has proven likely to meet our needs. While a more modern KVM implementation may (or may not) provide similar benefits, we are a better fit (license and otherwise) with the bhyve community than the kvm community. This RFD is not about whether we need byve or not, it is about how we will integrate it. Presumably there will be a separate RFD that covers bhyve itself. This is the cart before that horse. ------------------------------------------- smartos-discuss Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/184463/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/184463/25769125-55cfbc00 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=25769125&id_secret=25769125-7688e9fb Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
