Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2015 09:41:27 -0700 From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> To: Udo Rader <listudo@bestsolution.at> Cc: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Subject: Re: available hypervisors in FreeBSD Message-ID: <551C1FB7.1050501@redbarn.org> In-Reply-To: <551BC8B3.2030900@bestsolution.at> References: <551BC8B3.2030900@bestsolution.at>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Udo Rader wrote: > ... > > I understand, that bhyve is native to BSD and will probably be the most > effective. But given its relatively 'young age', is it production ready > for (non nested) x86/amd64 linux guests? there's no libvirt for bhyve yet, which turns some people off. (not me, i don't use libvirt in any case.) there's significant clock drift, even with kern.timecounter.hardware="TSC-low" in the guests: > ... > Jan 26 05:38:08 guests ntpd[619]: time reset +0.223304 s > Jan 26 06:06:22 guests ntpd[619]: time reset +0.196973 s > Jan 26 06:34:24 guests ntpd[619]: time reset +0.200070 s > Jan 26 07:08:28 guests ntpd[619]: time reset +0.210997 s > Jan 26 07:36:09 guests ntpd[619]: time reset +0.205481 s > Jan 26 08:10:04 guests ntpd[619]: time reset +0.205461 s > Jan 26 08:39:43 guests ntpd[619]: time reset +0.175491 s > Jan 26 09:10:29 guests ntpd[619]: time reset +0.189261 s > Jan 26 09:44:03 guests ntpd[619]: time reset +0.164616 s > Jan 26 10:20:25 guests ntpd[619]: time reset +0.176280 s > Jan 26 10:56:18 guests ntpd[619]: time reset +0.161555 s > Jan 26 11:39:53 guests ntpd[619]: time reset +0.166066 s > Jan 26 12:31:11 guests ntpd[619]: time reset +0.142994 s > ... (that's much worse with the default kern.timecounter.hardware value, but still rather absurd.) i use bhyve in production and seems altogether ready. -- Paul Vixie
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?551C1FB7.1050501>