KVM and Xen

[Gilboa Davara]

On Sun, 2006-12-31 at 12:30 -0500, Mike Chalmers wrote:
> On 12/31/06, Gilboa Davara <gilboad at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2006-12-30 at 18:15 -0500, Mike Chalmers wrote:
> > > I was wondering if anyone new about these and would explain them to me? Thanks.
> > >
> >
> > Short and simple.
> > Xen requires (in most cases *) a modified host and guest kernel and uses
> > its own management tools.
> > KVM requires certain extensions (Intel VT, AMD Pacifica/SVM **) to be
> > present on the host CPU and uses the QEMU front-end.
> >
> > As for what-to-use, well, a couple of questions:
> > A. What type of guest do you plan to virtualize? Windows? Linux? BSD?
> > B. Can you used kernel-modified guests?
> > C. Are you using VT/SVM enabled hardware?
> > D. Do you require additional features beyond "simple" virtualization?
> > (E.g. migration, snapshots, etc)
> >
> > - Gilboa
> > * Xen does support VT/SVN enabled hardware - but AFAIK it requires more
> > over-head then KVM.
> > ** Supported CPU cores:
> > Intel: P4 6xx, D9xx, Core Duo, Core 2 Duo, Xeon 3xxx/5xxx/7xxx.
> > AMD: Athlon64 AM2, AMD Opteron s1207/1xxx/2xxx/8xxx.
> >
> >
> > --
> > fedora-list mailing list
> > fedora-list at redhat.com
> > To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
> >
> Gilboa here is the answer to your questions. I would like to use KVM,
> if it is possible? Thanks.
> A. Windows
> B. don't know
> C. don't know (I am using a P4 3.0 ghz 800 mhz HT 478)
> D. don't know

AFAIR the 478 P4 doesn't include the required VT extensions.
As such, only QEMU or VMWare Player/Server can be used to run unmodified
guests. (Read: Windows)
Both are free.
QEMU is slower, but GPL.
VMWare is (much) faster, but it's close source and as such, if it
breaks, your own your own. *

- Gilboa
* Though in my experience, VMWare server is pretty stable.