Jailhouse: A Linux-based Partitioning Hypervisor

Re:Jailhouse: A Linux-based Partitioning Hypervisor by baruch on Wednesday November 20, 2013 @06:20AM (#6767397)

It can't be competing with LXC, with LXC you can do over-provisioning of the server and maximize the utilization. With Jailhouse you under-subscribe your system in order to get maximal separation and performance guarantees.

I can see using this for real-time applications alongside management stuff and for separating critical and possibly buggy kernel drivers to where they can't harm the rest of the system.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jailhouse: A Linux-based Partitioning Hypervisor by rbanffy on Wednesday November 20, 2013 @07:01AM (#6767532)

Be fair. It can be said they compete, but, due to their very different design priorities, they don't compete directly.

I don't think the benchmarks make much sense in this situation, unless you measure server utilization and performance guarantees (which is the dimension in which they differentiate themselves).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jailhouse: A Linux-based Partitioning Hypervisor by baruch on Wednesday November 20, 2013 @07:06AM (#6767555)

You are right.

One could use LXC for completely allocating a CPU for some container so they can compete on one aspect. LXC still doesn't run on bare-metal and so can't take on the cpu separation for hardware accesses but there is a dimension in which they compete.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Jailhouse: A Linux-based Partitioning Hypervisor by rbanffy on Wednesday November 20, 2013 @09:24AM (#6768095)

That's a really interesting idea - LXC and Jailhouse can be stacked in order to achieve both of their design goals.

[ Parent | on HN ]