From owner-freebsd-xen@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 20 10:00:24 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FEED106566C for ; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 10:00:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from w3.comete@gmail.com) Received: from mail-bw0-f54.google.com (mail-bw0-f54.google.com [209.85.214.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EC578FC0A for ; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 10:00:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bwz8 with SMTP id 8so1092439bwz.13 for ; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 03:00:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:sender:received :in-reply-to:references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=6BpkNhyoSkLcCE6GE2p5qCvzJWrVEBKUTUTXIqsapyY=; b=xNfnpP8x+7pKcLeoOz82jmljcDJtWfHknIuuJSs9MBlZPl6R+CRankX8ehihiIj1Hs E/HUY4Mw7lbfwhZSUa91vca/7NyorhoBEhFv9eq+wrdpy4oKCVjVZiSqHRolLXjvfyxn GYjcTu6e/nWP7JFp+i7KOVQrasvhBqVkpnbGw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=YnyuIAA3KEvFAoqRQ/3MtHa5Ms/76rC1knzP/fhFklckk3KlNAu0dnjs9vs3Y5VNVy kqENFTL5PFExZ/Y7xOzzogWw+N6nje0uN4crCm5S/YuSxqJZxGJ4E050ta87Rs73I+EF 2G9U0KMGmzVf9x2LHW2t32NwF5iu2WgiqNCWQ= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.42.21 with SMTP id q21mr1678890bke.179.1277028021900; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 03:00:21 -0700 (PDT) Sender: w3.comete@gmail.com Received: by 10.204.47.132 with HTTP; Sun, 20 Jun 2010 03:00:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <010101cb0fb1$e015e370$a041aa50$@fr> Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 12:00:21 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: q0peGxGPGPqUy9-gN3yOuXxZ0II Message-ID: From: Guillaume Seigneuret To: Pandu Poluan Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Host X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 10:00:24 -0000 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, =CF=89=C2=B3 Omega Cube Guillaume S. Network and System Security Architect Web : http://www.omegacube.fr Address : H=C3=B4tel Technologique - BP 100 Technop=C3=B4le de Ch=C3=A2teau 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 : > > H=C3=B4tel Technologique - BP 100 > > Technop=C3=B4le de Ch=C3=A2teau Gombert > > 13382 Marseille Cedex 13 > > > > > > -----Message d'origine----- > > De : owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.or= g] > De > > la part de Pandu Poluan > > Envoy=C3=A9 : samedi 19 juin 2010 07:53 > > =C3=80 : freebsd-xen@freebsd.org > > Objet : Paravirtualized FreeBSD 8 Guest on Citrix XenServer 5.5/5.6 Hos= t > > > > 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-unsubscribe@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-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >