Re: What X86/X64 OS's do we need coverage for?

From: Devrim Gündüz <devrim(at)CommandPrompt(dot)com>
To: "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)tocr(dot)com>
Cc: Larry Rosenman <ler(at)lerctr(dot)org>, "'Joshua D(dot) Drake'" <jd(at)CommandPrompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: What X86/X64 OS's do we need coverage for?
Date: 2007-04-06 06:42:38
Message-ID: 1175841758.1680.2.camel@your-0548c161e1
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

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).

Regards,
--
Devrim GÜNDÜZ
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedicated Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, ODBCng - http://www.CommandPrompt.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Suresh 2007-04-06 06:44:06 Postgres optimizer
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-04-06 06:37:15 Re: [PATCHES] Fix mdsync never-ending loop problem