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.
Comments
I've seen only the big players like OVH use OpenStack for their setups. It's more complicated to setup than for example Proxmox or libvirt. So it figures that smaller providers use the simpler alternatives. OpenStack is used more like a Cloud platform to mimic Amazon AWS and such.
Lol, so like AWS is the only cloud and everyone else is just copycats :')
If it was to mimic AWS, maybe OpenStack would be compliant to the AWS APIs.
Seems pretty simple to me. Also seems like the features available are very nice compared to Proxmox and other alternatives. The API is very nicely made and can be easily used to make a custom dashboard or WHMCS module.
Was just wondering if anyone had any experience with it and if there are any cons to using it VS Proxmox and the regulars.
Well I didn't use the correct phrase there. Maybe the "mimic" word should be replaced with "similar".
As for the @Gods, I work for a company that integrates OpenStack in their product, and I can say, that big companies perfer to use OpenStack for hosting VPS servers and Cloud. So it's possible but I didn't see that it's very common for the small companies on LET, as most small companies that sell VPS products just tend to lean to more out of the box solutions like Virtualizor, SolusVM etc. and the big players have the funding to develop integrations or use some of the more premium solutions that utilize OpenStack and all of it's features.
I just liked openstack because it was a bit more "whole" then other solutions and offered more future integration. For example block storage is already available, I could easily make auto scalable hosting services with some API usage. It was just beautiful, better than trying to create the same thing via libvirt api.
I was speaking with an analyst - and caveat, this was a few years ago - at that time she mentioned there were less than 90 Openstack based public clouds in the world.
I think there's just too much going on in the world for a cloud provider and/or a private enterprise to use Openstack at this point. It's a beast to get working - and I've heard of a few very sophisticated companies just completely abandoning it, sometimes after 7 figure investments - then to keep it up date, it's a lot of work. You need a vendor who his going to implement these new technologies, like serverless, AI... etc, while maintaining future compatibility for you. Otherwise you're just spending time maintaining your infrastructure, instead of advancing your business.
Disclaimer: yes, I work for a competitor, but this statement is 100% my personal opinion.
OpenStack is very complicated and has a lot of parts that need to be installed, maintained and tuned. Small deployments will not be profitable for a low end hosting provider.
So when is SolusVM v2.0 coming out?
The other day I met my friend who is studying in US and doing a project on different Cloud platforms. I remember him saying that OpenStack is easy to manage and can do well when scaled up.
This was in 2016 so I don't know whats the current scenario
@Gods, it sure is not easy. At least setting up everything.... Not easy when compared to KVM / Vmware etc.
The setup was okay, but I can see why it would be interpreted as hard. It has a lot of different services working together, but if you read the documentation it's pretty straight forward. I successfully installed Openstack with a controller and computer node and it's running fine.
I have system administration experience so it was pretty straight forward for me. One thing I would say is to make sure you put up a firewall and restrict access to the controller IP, the installation guide opens up Memecache and MySQL (no root pass), so beware of that for anyone that eases this in the future.
I mean it's pretty nice. They have modules for billing, dbaas, iaas, bare metal provision, DNS, load balancing, firewall, monitoring, alerts, and more. It's pretty good when you get it going, I see why companies use this. It's less work in the end to learn how to operate Openstack then to create these with third party software and knit them together into one application.
That's my take on it, but it really depends on your level of experience with system administration.
Get networking, billing, templating and console access automated with that...
It ain't easy and cheap. Not to mention the fact that it's UI is not as dumb-proof as most panels...
Yeah got a lot more to read on the documentation. But once you get horizon, the dashboard, and the billing installed, it's very smooth. The hard part comes when I have to use the API to make my own dashbaord and make sure openstack is behaving correctly.
A thread 1.5 years ago on "Openstack backed providers":
https://www.lowendtalk.com/discussion/86247/openstack-backed-providers
Actually Swift (OpenStack object storage) is compatible with the Amazon S3 API.
I see there's a project for EC2 compatibility as well: https://github.com/openstack/ec2-api
Yes, OpenStack can be pretty complex to install and maintain, but there's no other open source competitor that has this level of feature matrix. Not even sure if paid software is close.
For instance, just have a look at the storage and networking drivers/compatibility matrix:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/CinderSupportMatrix
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron_Plugins_and_Drivers
We've found OpenStack Ansible to be pretty good to deploy and maintain production public clouds:
https://docs.openstack.org/openstack-ansible/latest/
Successfully upgraded from Newton -> Mitaca -> Ocata -> Pike.
Queens upgrade is next on our to-do.
Oh, here's a small provider using OpenStack https://intovps.com
No, it's not, by no means - OpenStack Swift is far from compatible with S3 API, there's a middleware you can use to emulate it - but OpenStack Swift isn't compatible at all.
At the same time, keep in mind that the current existing gateways for Swift -> S3 compatibility sucks and tend to be very unstable, most people that ran it in production quickly ended up disabling it due to too many issues.
True, there's a middleware.
Exactly, so Swift isn't compatible.