KVM or VMWare
-
@stacksofplates @IRJ
While you are both correct with your statements. The idea that the typical SMB is using or even understands these tools is ignoring reality of the typical SMB.This really sums it up.
@irj said in KVM or VMWare:
I would say most SMBs
who aren't trained in IaCwould be better off with other options.This is why it is either vCenter, Proxmox, or Hyper-V Manager
-
@jaredbusch said in KVM or VMWare:
@stacksofplates @IRJ
While you are both correct with your statements. The idea that the typical SMB is using or even understands these tools is ignoring reality of the typical SMB.This really sums it up.
@irj said in KVM or VMWare:
I would say most SMBs
who aren't trained in IaCwould be better off with other options.This is why it is either vCenter, Proxmox, or Hyper-V Manager
I agree, and I knew what you meant. However, you didn't specifically say SMB. You said any business. You did also mention it was places you consulted so it could be assumed you meant SMB.
However, this ML so I had to argue
-
-
What about XCP-ng? Would that be something to consider to run a business on?
-
This post is deleted! -
@hobbit666 said in KVM or VMWare:
What about XCP-ng? Would that be something to consider to run a business on?
I am unclear on how supported it is. Tech wise, it is still KVM.
-
@jaredbusch said in KVM or VMWare:
@hobbit666 said in KVM or VMWare:
What about XCP-ng? Would that be something to consider to run a business on?
I am unclear on how supported it is. Tech wise, it is still KVM.
Xcp-ng isn't kvm, it's Xen.
-
@dustinb3403 said in KVM or VMWare:
@jaredbusch said in KVM or VMWare:
@hobbit666 said in KVM or VMWare:
What about XCP-ng? Would that be something to consider to run a business on?
I am unclear on how supported it is. Tech wise, it is still KVM.
Xcp-ng isn't kvm, it's Xen.
I know that. I don't know why I typed KVM. I blame lack of coffee yesterday afternoon.
-
@jaredbusch It is supported you can either pay for support or run OpenSource.
https://xcp-ng.com/It has been super stable compared to Xenserver/Citrix XenServer.
-
@dbeato said in KVM or VMWare:
@jaredbusch It is supported you can either pay for support or run OpenSource.
https://xcp-ng.com/It has been super stable compared to Xenserver/Citrix XenServer.
Not looking to take over or diverge too much, but what stability issues did you have on Citrix? We're a 95% Citrix shop and rarely have issues with the hypervisor knock wood Just wondering if we're lucky or if there's something else at play.
-
@notverypunny said in KVM or VMWare:
@dbeato said in KVM or VMWare:
@jaredbusch It is supported you can either pay for support or run OpenSource.
https://xcp-ng.com/It has been super stable compared to Xenserver/Citrix XenServer.
Not looking to take over or diverge too much, but what stability issues did you have on Citrix? We're a 95% Citrix shop and rarely have issues with the hypervisor knock wood Just wondering if we're lucky or if there's something else at play.
I never had any issues with stability when running Xenserver. I quit using it because they kept pulling features out of it, or charging licensing fees for features that were once free.
-
@notverypunny said in KVM or VMWare:
@dbeato said in KVM or VMWare:
@jaredbusch It is supported you can either pay for support or run OpenSource.
https://xcp-ng.com/It has been super stable compared to Xenserver/Citrix XenServer.
Not looking to take over or diverge too much, but what stability issues did you have on Citrix? We're a 95% Citrix shop and rarely have issues with the hypervisor knock wood Just wondering if we're lucky or if there's something else at play.
We have both xenserver and xcp-ng servers but don't notice any difference. It's the same code base after all.
Never had any stability issues with either. If we did would have looked for something else right away.
-
@wls-itguy said in KVM or VMWare:
We're getting ready for our server refresh and along with that our license is up for renewal for VMWare. I am curious to the benefits of KVM over VMWare.
What do you use and why?
Lower cost. More options. Less risk.
Risk is easy.... VMware has licensing risk. Both risk that you do something wrong (hard risk) and risk that you waste time obtaining, verifying, updating, purchasing, etc. (soft risk.) We rank the risk of VMware licensing alone as being larger than the total risk of most KVM deployments. VMware's complex licensing risk (while not terrible) is enough to use as proof that it has to be removed from most short lists. Just did this with a bank this week.
-
@dashrender said in KVM or VMWare:
Why isn't ProxMox on the list?
MS just killed Hyper-V so I get why it's not there.
It is. KVM vs. VMware.
-
@dashrender said in KVM or VMWare:
MS just killed Hyper-V so I get why it's not there.
What the heck are you talking about?
-
@dashrender said in KVM or VMWare:
@marcinozga said in KVM or VMWare:
@dashrender said in KVM or VMWare:
MS just killed Hyper-V so I get why it's not there.
Do you have a source of this claim? Because abandoning free Hyper-V server is not the same as killing Hyper-V. Server role is still there.
meh - same ultimate difference. sure the role is still there, but that's not what nearly anyone should be using.
What? That you don't like it is not related to it being discontinued. But even besides that, what's wrong with it? Why isn't it a clear improvement over VMware in 99% of cases still?
-
@irj said in KVM or VMWare:
@jaredbusch said in KVM or VMWare:
@hobbit666 said in KVM or VMWare:
Didn't get on with KVM but thats down to my skill set. (i.e. limited linux skills)
No business should run on just KVM. Until the most current iteration of Proxmox I would never recommend KVM for a business.
I have used it personally for years now. But that is different than running a business. A business needs simple easy to follow processes that are enabled by things like Proxmox, vCenter, and Hyper-V Manager.
Unless you use terraform or similar to build your servers on KVM. You would then need to leverage bash/powershell to do the builds. Then you have a very repeatable process that doesn't rely on GUI management. You can also use an open source tool like Jenkins to manage pipelines for deployment so it's easy repeatable.
I would say most SMBs who aren't trained in IaC would be better off with other options.
I would say that anyone that doesn't know how to use KVM well is just as unsafe (but doesn't know it) with VMware and should be even more wary to continue. If any business, of any size, lacks the skills to do IT well then they should address that rather than implementing something wrong poorly and just looking the other way. KVM remains the better answer for exactly that reason.
-
@scottalanmiller said in KVM or VMWare:
@irj said in KVM or VMWare:
@jaredbusch said in KVM or VMWare:
@hobbit666 said in KVM or VMWare:
Didn't get on with KVM but thats down to my skill set. (i.e. limited linux skills)
No business should run on just KVM. Until the most current iteration of Proxmox I would never recommend KVM for a business.
I have used it personally for years now. But that is different than running a business. A business needs simple easy to follow processes that are enabled by things like Proxmox, vCenter, and Hyper-V Manager.
Unless you use terraform or similar to build your servers on KVM. You would then need to leverage bash/powershell to do the builds. Then you have a very repeatable process that doesn't rely on GUI management. You can also use an open source tool like Jenkins to manage pipelines for deployment so it's easy repeatable.
I would say most SMBs who aren't trained in IaC would be better off with other options.
I would say that anyone that doesn't know how to use KVM well is just as unsafe (but doesn't know it) with VMware and should be even more wary to continue. If any business, of any size, lacks the skills to do IT well then they should address that rather than implementing something wrong poorly and just looking the other way. KVM remains the better answer for exactly that reason.
The problem is paying for the talent. I was talking to a former coworker in a fortune 100. They are can't find people who are qualified to do DevOps. They have to keep raising pay and still not getting bites.
-
@irj said in KVM or VMWare:
@scottalanmiller said in KVM or VMWare:
@irj said in KVM or VMWare:
@jaredbusch said in KVM or VMWare:
@hobbit666 said in KVM or VMWare:
Didn't get on with KVM but thats down to my skill set. (i.e. limited linux skills)
No business should run on just KVM. Until the most current iteration of Proxmox I would never recommend KVM for a business.
I have used it personally for years now. But that is different than running a business. A business needs simple easy to follow processes that are enabled by things like Proxmox, vCenter, and Hyper-V Manager.
Unless you use terraform or similar to build your servers on KVM. You would then need to leverage bash/powershell to do the builds. Then you have a very repeatable process that doesn't rely on GUI management. You can also use an open source tool like Jenkins to manage pipelines for deployment so it's easy repeatable.
I would say most SMBs who aren't trained in IaC would be better off with other options.
I would say that anyone that doesn't know how to use KVM well is just as unsafe (but doesn't know it) with VMware and should be even more wary to continue. If any business, of any size, lacks the skills to do IT well then they should address that rather than implementing something wrong poorly and just looking the other way. KVM remains the better answer for exactly that reason.
The problem is paying for the talent. I was talking to a former coworker in a fortune 100. They are can't find people who are qualified to do DevOps. They have to keep raising pay and still not getting bites.
Just because they don't have the ability to attract talent doesn't mean that it's not the better option. It's a fake problem. The talent is available, and it is affordable, they either have failed processes in searching, or their willingness to hire is poor. There's no shortage of KVM talent, so anyone telling you that they can't hire is actually telling you that they are so bad at searching that they can't function as a business or they are so bad to work for that no amount of money can fix it.
A company can sabotage its own efforts in anything. But at the end of the day, KVM skills are available and affordable. Until that resource is tapped out and there is a shortage, no claims from any business tell us that KVM is a bad choice, only that they are a bad company.
-
@scottalanmiller said in KVM or VMWare:
There's no shortage of KVM talent, so anyone telling you that they can't hire is actually telling you that they are so bad at searching that they can't function as a business or they are so bad to work for that no amount of money can fix it.
This simply isn't true. No one in the enterprise space runs qemu/libvirt. They've developed their own APIs (gvisor, firecracker, etc).
