[lkml]   [2006]   [Mar]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] Virtualization steps
Dave Hansen wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-03-25 at 04:33 +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
>> Oh, after you come to an agreement and start posting patches, can you
>> also outline why we want this in the kernel (what it does that low
>> level virtualization doesn't, etc, etc)
> Can you wait for an OLS paper? ;)
> I'll summarize it this way: low-level virtualization uses resource
> inefficiently.
> With this higher-level stuff, you get to share all of the Linux caching,
> and can do things like sharing libraries pretty naturally.
> They are also much lighter-weight to create and destroy than full
> virtual machines. We were planning on doing some performance
> comparisons versus some hypervisors like Xen and the ppc64 one to show
> scaling with the number of virtualized instances. Creating 100 of these
> Linux containers is as easy as a couple of shell scripts, but we still
> can't find anybody crazy enough to go create 100 Xen VMs.

But these require a modified O/S, do they not? Or do I read that
incorrectly? Is this going to be real virtualization able to run any O/S?

Frankly I don't see running 100 VMs as a realistic goal, being able to
run Linux, Windows, Solaris and BEOS unmodified in 4-5 VMs would be far
more useful.
> Anyway, those are the things that came to my mind first. I'm sure the
> others involved have their own motivations.
> -- Dave

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-03-28 06:32    [W:0.166 / U:6.772 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site