From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Sun Dec 20 16:10:08 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0723EA4DAA6 for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 16:10:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from listudo@bestsolution.at) Received: from mail.bestsolution.at (mail.bestsolution.at [94.198.139.5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD0031EE9 for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 16:10:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from listudo@bestsolution.at) Received: from marathon.bestsolution.at (mara.bestsolution.at [172.16.5.80]) by mail.bestsolution.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id A354E4E6C23 for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 16:04:49 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=bestsolution.at; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type :in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date:date:message-id:from :from:references:subject:subject:received:received; s=default; t=1450623886; x=1452438287; bh=GvNXQ06mQ22LQ54gAS97iaiDiwC01hNf f0hH3kFipTs=; b=cH0pEX0+lDbNB8tGxjuqszEJizfMxV6fkNbXGl1W6Z5Jl8Rb r553hVWdwBLtkQt1dNtACxns0a+rLP81DcB/p06ZhZPuPeU4J8GizSJxZZpv0p/y Nnbv08yKQ4D1G3AhkBbkKnAxz4NIl4QGgikt9b/AjDbAPp4GtUvu9MnLkQg= X-Virus-Scanned: BestSolution.at amavisd-new at bestsolution.at Received: from mail.bestsolution.at ([127.0.0.1]) by marathon.bestsolution.at (marathon.bestsolution.at [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id llwvYCsTltzS for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 16:04:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from artio.bestsolution.at (77.117.125.130.wireless.dyn.drei.com [77.117.125.130]) by mail.bestsolution.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A2C2D4E6C1F for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 16:04:46 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: available hypervisors in FreeBSD To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org References: <551BC8B3.2030900@bestsolution.at> From: Udo Rader Message-ID: <5676D19E.7050103@bestsolution.at> Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 17:04:46 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 16:10:08 -0000 On 12/20/2015 09:15 AM, Peter Ross wrote: > Hi all, > > I read through an older threat I kept in my archive. It started like this: > > On Wed, 1 Apr 2015, Udo Rader wrote: > >> As far as my homework digging revealed, FreeBSD supports four >> hypervisors: >> >> * bhyve >> * KVM >> * QEMU >> * VirtualBox > > .. and later Xen was mentioned. > > I ask myself which of the solutions are most mature at the moment and > immediately usable in production. > > Reason is a potential company move from VMware ESXi/Centos(6/7) with > some critical Windows 2008 and 2012 IIS/.NET applications) involved. > > While most of open source may go into FreeBSD jails, we have a few > CentOS6/7 boxes with proprietary software we have to keep, as well as > the Windows VMs to maintain (there is a long term effort to move them to > Open Source too but the final migration of all may be years away). > > We may phase out ESXi gradually, or just keep it, depending on the > performance and maturity of FreeBSD based solutions. > > I have experience with Linux on VirtualBox and it worked well if the > load was not high but the performance wasn't too good when under stress > (but it never crashed, I might add). > > Which of the solutions are worth testing? Do you have recommendations? > > I am thinking of server software and "containerisation" only, so USB > passthrough or PCI etc. is not really important. > > Stability, performance and resource utilisation (e.g. possible > over-allocation of RAM) are matter most. two thoughts: first, PCI passthru is a nice thing if you want to directly address NICs, which again is a nice feature for virtualized servers relying in almost native network throughput. and second, but you are probably aware of that already, IIRC Xen dom0 support is quite new & lacks some features (http://wiki.xenproject.org/wiki/FreeBSD_Dom0)