Subject: Re: Xen3/PAE problems with domainU
To: Jonathan A. Kollasch <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Todd Vierling <email@example.com>
Date: 08/05/2006 01:51:38
On Sat, 5 Aug 2006, Jonathan A. Kollasch wrote:
> See the "x86-32 PAE" thread at http://mail-index.netbsd.org/port-i386/2005/07/.
> General drift I get of it is that PAE is a ugly hack.
That's a given. Shoehorning >4G into a 32-bit address space is indeed ugly,
no matter how you slice it. But sometimes that's a limitation you're forced
to endure for various reasons (like investing money in decent servers just
before EM64T was a standard feature on the I-brand chips).
> Or, we just run plain NetBSD/i386 or amd64 like one would Windows on a
> Vanderpool or Pacifica-enabled chip.
Well, that's a hell of a performance hit. We have added quirk workarounds
for things as off the wall as Virtual PC before.
> > (As to the host in question, the proprietor has asked me not to mention its
> > name until the NetBSD configuration is actually working and they're ready to
> > advertise that fact. Let me just say that this would be a *very* cost
> > effective way to get a dedicated-like NetBSD hosting plan, and well worth
> > whatever effort is needed to get it working. ;)
> Hey, I know of at least two other places that are still running Xen 2,
> and advertise NetBSD as a choice.
Which of them are on large North American bandwidth pipes? 8-)
-- Todd Vierling <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>