| OpenVZ is better than Xen [message #3119] |
Sat, 13 May 2006 01:00  |
John Kelly
Messages: 97
Registered: May 2006
Location: Palmetto State
|
Member |
|
|
For my needs, OpenVZ is better than Xen. The one-kernel approach conserves memory, leaving more for applications. And having all VPS in one disk partition saves disk space.
A surprise bonus was the template cache management with yum. The ease of keeping templates updated and quickly installing new operating environments is yummy!
I never had much interest in Fedora, but I'm converted now. I'll use Fedora just to have OpenVZ.
I wish the developers much success getting their kernel patches into Linus tree.
|
|
|
|
| Re: OpenVZ is better than Xen [message #3122 is a reply to message #3119] |
Sat, 13 May 2006 05:38  |
RapidVPS
Messages: 32
Registered: January 2006
|
Member |
|
|
Hi John, I agree with you very much. I would say for enterprise use where cost/efficiency is not a factor, Xen has an edge over VZ. However for a service provider or other situation where CPU/RAM/DISK resources are shared among environments to ensure profitability/efficiency, openvz is far superior. Also, VZ is much simpler to use, and all of the command line utilities are well documented.
Rick
[Updated on: Sat, 13 May 2006 05:39] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: OpenVZ is better than Xen [message #3140 is a reply to message #3122] |
Sun, 14 May 2006 22:51 |
John Kelly
Messages: 97
Registered: May 2006
Location: Palmetto State
|
Member |
|
|
Xen is nice if you need multiple kernels, or maybe Linux and NetBSD on one box. But I only need multiple secure operating environments, not multiple kernels. I don't have unlimited memory and disk, so I need to conserve my resources as much as possible.
|
|
|
|
OpenVZ Forum
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
