For the AWS coturn image, is there a performance benefit to using paravirtual over hvm virtualization? Or was the choice arbitrary? about coturn HOT 3 CLOSED

I did not say that. I just said that check the technical specs and choose
one that has better network throughput.

Oleg

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 2:44 PM, bloodfire91 [email protected]
wrote:

So you guys think that pv better network driver interactions over hvm? I'm
just curious because I know that some hvm machines have the option for
enhanced networking feature on AWS; Were you guys able to look into this?

—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#61 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFq2UGYPFvFrGKUVAIasQxL7oLSQQzI4ks5qj15XgaJpZM4JucwD
.

from coturn.

the main performance problem is the network throughput. You have to use the
technology that provides the best network driver interactions.

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 1:41 PM, bloodfire91 [email protected]
wrote:

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#61, or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFq2UDO3g9BKpLXpZv_Yzynyy8YntIfFks5qj0-RgaJpZM4JucwD
.

from coturn.

So you guys think that pv better network driver interactions over hvm? I'm just curious because I know that some hvm machines have the option for enhanced networking feature on AWS; Were you guys able to look into this?

from coturn.