On Wed Jan 13, 2010 at 21:58:37 +0700, Sthu Deus wrote:
> As I have heard that vserver package does not work well in Debian, I would
> like to hear Your opinion (if any) on what is working more stable (well for
> use in production systems):
>
> 1. vserver
> 2. openvz
> 3. something else
You need to say what you're using them for. Otherwise people who have
experience with vserver will say it rocks, people who use openvz will
say that rocks, and people using Xen will say that's even better.
If you're using it for something specific then your needs and
preferences will be adjusted accordingly.
e.g. vserver means that all guests share the same kernel as the host
system, and that memory can be overcommitted if you want it to be.
If you run Xen or KVM then each guest will be fully isolated and
can run different kernels.
Is that a good thing? It depends what you're using the guests for,
and how much overhead you want.
In practise if you're doing "nothing special", such as just hosting
apache & ssh, then all of them are about equal. There is no single
clear winner, and choosing will be a matter of:
* Which is easiest to install/manage/use.
* Which has best documentation.
* Which people nearby are using, so you can chat about in the pub.
For me? Xen was good, but the slow progress of getting it into the
mainline kernel meant there was a long period where you couldn't run it
on "modern" (new) hardware. So KVM wins.
Other people will mention openbox, vmware, etc. At the end of the day
you should decide why you want it, what it must do then try out one or
two. Chances are many of the options will be good enough - but asking
"Which is best" is not a useful way forward; different people have
different use-cases and different biases.
Steve
--
http://www.steve.org.uk/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
