Re: [Vserver] VServer vs OpenVZ

From: Alex Lyashkov <shadow_at_psoft.net>
Date: Wed 07 Dec 2005 - 15:57:31 GMT
Message-Id: <1133971051.4251.43.camel@berloga.shadowland>

, 07.12.2005, 16:34, Herbert Poetzl :
> On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 06:44:43AM +0200, Alex Lyashkov wrote:
> >
> > > (will use Z for OpenVZ and S for Linux-VServer)
> > >
> > > > Factors of interest are
> > > > - stability,
> > >
> > > Z: the announcement reads "first stable OVZ version"
> > > S: we are at version 2.0.1 (> two years stable releases)
> > >
> > And all this time VServer need a hack for allow bind socket to
> > INADDR_ANY at VPS ;-)
>
> hmm, well, it works reasonably fine .. no?
>
The thing that I find unreasonable is that you cannot bind to INADDR_ANY
on
the host server, without affecting all the VPSes.
This basically means that if you have default bind (or ssh) installed on
the HOST system, no VPSes will be able to bring up those services.

> > Z Have: COW VFS (simular unionfs),
>
> S: has CoW link breaking (more powerful than unionfs :)
>
CoW link requires glibc modification, while VZFS does not.
The negative side of VZFS is double buffering, due to it being stackable
FS.
> > Virtual networking support,
> > Fair-share scheduler
>
> S: priority and hard cpu schedulers
>
This is not the same. Priority and hard limits don't provide fair share
CPU scheduling. Two different things (three).

> > Z don`t have: disk namespace support
> > (but create vroot simular FreeBSD Jail).
>
> but I guess we are heading towards a feature
> shootout (which is fine for me, but isn't very
> important for the userbase, I guess :)
>
> best,
> Herbert
>
> PS: nice to hear from you!
> PPS: is there anything left from the cooperation
> we started a year ago (or so)?
>
It would be great, but somewhat difficult as Vserver and FreeVPS use
different ideology. VServer and OpenVZ store context id at kernel
objects level (it's easier to develop, but slows down access to context
data).
FreeVPS stores pointer to context structure, at kernel object (more
work, debugging, but much faster access to data, that is needed for each
context switch).
I see a lot of potential in the possible merge, but I consider the way
FreeVPS works with context ids to be much more efficient. I also
consider it fairly critical for optimum performance on a server with
large number of VPSes. It would be great to work together though, but it
makes sense only if VServer developers are interested in merging
projects/porting some of the
FreeVPS staff to VServers as well.

Other side - FreeVPS used RH EL kernels. this adds stability to the
kernel API, while all the bug fixes are back ported.
At the same time Vserver can continue to use bleeding edge kernels/be
portable across all the platforms
If compare features - FreeVPS has all features which VServer have at
x86 platform. Yet, at this moment it is the only platform supported.

-- 
FreeVPS Developers Team  http://www.freevps.com
Positive Software        http://www.psoft.net
_______________________________________________
Vserver mailing list
Vserver@list.linux-vserver.org
http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver
Received on Wed Dec 7 15:58:04 2005
[Next/Previous Months] [Main vserver Project Homepage] [Howto Subscribe/Unsubscribe] [Paul Sladen's vserver stuff]
Generated on Wed 07 Dec 2005 - 15:58:08 GMT by hypermail 2.1.8