> For what it is worth, I have found that "container" solutions often
> scale
> better to the actual workload than "pretend hardware" virtualization
> does,
> because it shares RAM between the containers much more easily for these
> tiny,
> almost nothing, applications.

I agree that paravirtualization and container "virtualization" are very 
effective for a lot of purposes - but there's one really important restriction -

For containers, the "guest" can only be the same version of the same OS as the 
host... 
And...
For paravirtualization, the guest must be specifically built for that 
situation, which could theoretically mean you can run any guest OS, but 
practically, it often means the guest OS must be very similar to the host.  
(Run linux inside of linux, etc.)  You're basically not going to run 
paravirtualized windows in a linux host, for example.


_______________________________________________
Tech mailing list
[email protected]
http://lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech
This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators
 http://lopsa.org/

Reply via email to