Posted by: Anonymous
[ip: 64.251.80.98]
on September 26, 2007 08:26 PM
"You can expect a normal VM to run at about 50% of the speed of a native machine, whereas a Xen virtual machine can run up to about 95%, simply by removing the need for binary patching and other virtual hacks." --- This is wrong, and easily provable by comparing Xen to the free VMWare Server. The difference in performance between the two is about 10 to 15% (Xen is faster). The difference shrinks a lot, when you install special VMWare device drives on the guest OSes. These device drivers bypass the emulated hardware, and use a special API to the VMWare kernel.
"The downside to Xen is that the source code has to be patched, which rules out closed-source operating systems." --- This is wrong too. It is not really "patching", but Xen is basically its own architecture. This architecture is documented, so anyone can port to it. Microsoft has joined Xen, and will be making Windows available for Xen.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Quite a lot of errors...
Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 64.251.80.98] on September 26, 2007 08:26 PM"The downside to Xen is that the source code has to be patched, which rules out closed-source operating systems." --- This is wrong too. It is not really "patching", but Xen is basically its own architecture. This architecture is documented, so anyone can port to it. Microsoft has joined Xen, and will be making Windows available for Xen.
#