bhyve was superior in performance and licensing so that is why pluribus chose it ages ago. I support making bhyve our hypervisor of choice. On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 5:05 PM Mike Gerdts <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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> > <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/184463/22103350-51080293> | > Modify > <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> > Your Subscription <http://www.listbox.com> > ------------------------------------------- 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
