New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Opinions needed, Xen - KVM - OpenVZ
AnthonySmith
Member, Patron Provider
Hi Folks,
I don't think it is very likely that Inception Hosting will be standing up any further Xen nodes once the current stock is exhausted (pretty close).
I am not looking for any "OpenVZ SUX" type replies here I am just wondering what the community would rather see out of the following 3 options/directions:
1) Don't stop doing Xen you crazy fool..!
2) KVM is the future, get with the times,,!
3) A cheaper OpenVZ option would be nice to see but it seems pointless in the day and age.
I am leaning towards option 2
Ant.
Comments
Xen-PV is still ok even with the KVM craze. OVZ keeps evolving, it is lean and fast, but not compatible enough.
I think Xen is not finished. But I like it too much so I am probably not unbiased.
M
2 and 3
I would choose 2 and 3.
And if you still curious, I have some idea
Setup a node for each virtualization, and ask for user to test them.
You will see which one running out of stock so fast, and that's what people want for.
Another one, ask the user to hammering the node, and then see which one will survive . Just like I did in Indonesian Webhosting Forum, and I only succeded in creating load to 600
It depends
While keeping the company small it would probably be wise to not try to do every type of virtualisation. It will create more "administrative" tasks on yourself to keep everything patched and updated.
I think that openvz has its place in the lev community but theres also alot of providers using it. The only real thing you would be able to get customers is based on your server locations.
When looking on the types of vps that I have, I'm still looking for my first kvm. So regarding your given options: 2
I would personally like to see a provider offer vsphere 5. Thats something new for the lowen market.
Pick either XenPV or KVM (I'm happy with either)
and add in a couple OpenVZ nodes.
2 & 3
My vote also goes to 2 & 3.
1 or 2.
every host ever has openvz. what makes people want to pick your service over others? My reason before was because you had xen pv, which allowed me to run archlinux. And at the time I didn't have a good provider in a good location in Europe with ipv6, instant rdns, gigabit uplink, and quality disk. If you still had the other qualities after switching to openvz, you might be able to get away with it. Otherwise, I would go kvm.
Why are pushing back xen?
Definitely not pointless if done right.
What's the difference for me, as for a customer, between Xen and KVM? Except OS installs from ISOs
Xen PV is not full virtual, is paravirtualization and as such has lower overhead and the kernel is tweaked specially for Xen. Xen's equivalent for KVM is XenHVM, both use qemu.
You can still run any app you want on Xen-PV, no windows sadly.
M
For me personally, I lost confidence with troubles I read from LET. E.g. the one experienced by SD
So, again - as for a customer, running his 3 sites and 1 jabber server, what difference does it make for me? 5% more perfomance?
Could be more, depending on app, but yeah, performance is the most important gain.
M
/me now looking at http://blog.xen.org/index.php/2011/11/29/baremetal-vs-xen-vs-kvm-redux/ , benchmarks by Xen community, where KVM and Xen+patches work pretty simillar in terms of performance.
There you see the xen-HVM flavor. That is the virtualization done with the support of specific hardware extensions built into modern CPU. Xen-PV is a bit different as it doesn't require hw support but use custom kernels.
There is some kind of HVMPV. Dunno what's that.
it's HVM + paravirtualized drivers. It's like KVM with virtio modules / drivers
Xen-HVM is more or less similar with KVM, from end-user point of view, Xen-PV, on the other hand, is the virtualization where the kernel is aware it is running in a virtual environment and doesnt even need AMD-V or Intel-VT enabled in the CPU.
It is some kind of a container with own kernel cooperating with the host instead of a container without kernel relying on host kernel to do the job as in OVZ.
You have advantages over OVZ, you can put own modules in the kernel without having to ask the host, peripherals are virtualized, so you don't have to "invent" devices for VPN as in OVZ, but it has higher overhead than OVZ, however lower than KVM.
"Paravirtualisation is always better.
In PV, VM will aware of that IO should be handled by host and VM will generate a direct call to the Hypervisor. But the Guest OS should be modified and installed with the drivers (block and network) through which VM kernel will directly call hypervisor.
In FV, there is no need for the guest to be modified but the Guest should be given the emulated devices (BIOS, block,network) which VM Kernel will generate the normal system call with emulated devices which call further the hypervisor. Emulation consumes lot of CPU time therefore VM will slow in handling the IO"
M.
1 or 2 for me.
Even more to 1 because is PV, as @Maounique says.
You're doing well with that and we like it, so don't stop doing what work for you as well for us you crazy fool..!
in addition to security. You can't enter a xen / kvm container like you can with ovz. However, unfortunately most providers here use solusvm, which means you gave them your root password.
@fly
So, you don't change your password?? ¬¬
//_-. I know all that technical stuff.
As a buyer, I don't care about it. All I care about:
1. Whether my apps will run and how will they run;
2. How error-proof is this technology, i.e. how often and hard I will notice bugs;
3. How the technology is supported by it's authors. Like considering service quality when buying a car.
4. Goodness of overall design, whether it's considered kosher or not.
5. Other features, which can affect me. Like memory overcommitment in OVZ.
2 for sure. Kvm is as close as you can get to a dedi and i love it. Xen hvm has some issues.
I'm going to be offering KVM, but I dont think I will do a 2 dollar 128mb version of it because of all the spammers tends to attract.
This false "I am in control" KVM trend is lately so widely spread over LET while I bet that 99.9% of us, users can do everything what we need with good old stable great peforming Xen-PV
Apart from wasting my time and playing with own ISOs I haven't found even one advantage with KVM over Xen - from user perspective. When I order VPS for something more serious I prefer to set it up and then use long term not to play with virtualization itself.
Personally, (and this is 100% personal preference), I prefer KVM over Xen or OpenVZ. Its just how I got used to it and I just feel like I can do more with KVM than Xen, but hey that's just me.
More in what way? Imho. there's more "kvm masturbators" than people which would really prefer this type of virtualization above others because their long term serious work.