> > It is good news to talk about OVM 3.x > > From the technical view, direct control for OVM Hypervisor is best way to > implement. In this case, we can not use OVM Manager. Since OVM Manager > does not have synchronization with OVM Hypervisor(OVS). > > From the business view, it is better to integrate OVM via OVM Manager, > since we can use both CloudStack and OVM Manager.
I think you can use OVM manager even CloudStack uses hypervisor API to control host. Given the hypervisor API is officially released by Oracle, it should not conflict with OVM manager > > Any way, let's start to integrate OVM 3.x quickly. > > Choonho Son, > > 2013/2/20 Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com>: > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:40:06AM -0800, Frank Zhang wrote: > >> > > > >> > > At the moment I'm diving into OVM 3.2.1 Support in Cloudstack. > >> > > I've > >> > noticed that only 2.3 support is in there now and found some > >> > earlier mails (June 2012) from people who were looking into getting > >> > 3.x support in. There are several paths that could be taken with > >> > the integration, my initial thoughts are to move along the lines the 2.3 > implementation followed. > >> > > > >> > > My question is if anyone else is thinking about this or working > >> > > on this and if > >> > so, if it would be useful to collaborate on this? > >> > > > >> > > Cheers, > >> > > > >> > > Funs > >> > > >> > AFAIK, nobody has stepped up to "fix" OVM support in CloudStack yet.. > >> > and if you're willing to work on it great! > >> > > >> > Frank (cc'ed) had mentioned that he was working on it for > CloudPlatform [1]. > >> > If that's the case, he may have working code... but it would have > >> > to be donated to Apache for it to be included. I'm also not sure > >> > what version of OVM he was working to enable. > >> > > >> > Frank - Can you comment, so that Funs is able to figure out where > >> > things stand? Want to collaborate with him on an Apache re- > implementation? > >> > > >> > -chip > >> > >> The main reason OVM not working in ACS is about license. > >> I have multiple important patches to OVM agent which is LGPL licensed. > >> Another reason is OVM2.3 is too old, it's Domain0 kernel is 2.6.18 > >> which is approximately > >> 6 years old that cannot work properly on recent hardware(the main > >> issue we faced is vconfig doesn't support some networkcard). > >> > >> Given community is starting some effort on OVM3, I would suggest > >> focusing on OVM3 rather than bring OVM2 back > >> > >> > > > > Makes perfect sense to me! > > > > -chip
