Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Building a pacemaker cluster to manage Xen domU virtual machines the sysadm can choose between to different resource agents:

Both will support the usual start/stop operations and live migration between running nodes. The Xen ra implements the monitor action by running xm list (which I do know can be really slow sometime, leading to problems if the monitor timeout is set too low), the libvirt one uses virsh domstate (which I don't know how it is implemented).

Overall, the two RA seem to be nearly identical in features.

Is there any reason to prefer one resource type over the other when planning and implementing a new cluster?

share|improve this question
up vote 2 down vote accepted

libvirt is a programming API allowing for developing applications that manage hypervisors. It is completely hypervisor-independent, meaning it can manage Xen, KVM, VMware, Hyper-V, etc., through the same API.

So if you want to build a system that is hypervisor-agonstic, or you're running different types of hypervisors, you would want to use libvirt to manage them. This way you use the same code to perform an operation regardless of whether the underlying hypervisor is Xen, Hyper-V, KVM, VMware, or something else.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.