Re: What X86/X64 OS's do we need coverage for?
| От | Matthew O'Connor |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: What X86/X64 OS's do we need coverage for? |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 4615FC8C.4070804@zeut.net обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: What X86/X64 OS's do we need coverage for? (Devrim Gündüz <devrim@CommandPrompt.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: What X86/X64 OS's do we need coverage for?
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
Devrim Gündüz wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, 2007-04-06 at 01:23 -0400, Matthew T. O'Connor wrote: >> The other thing to consider is that CentOS 5 has Xen built right in, >> so you should be able run VMs without VMWare on it. > > ... if the kernel of the OS has Xen support, there will be no > performance penalty (only 2%-3%) (Para-virtualization). Otherwise, there > will be full-virtualization, and we should expect a performance loss > about 30% for each guest OS (like Windows). I may be wrong but I thought that the guest OS kernel only needs special support if the underlying CPU doesn't have virtualization support which pretty much all the new Intel and AMD chips have. No?
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: