Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Why KVM?
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.

Why KVM?

SimpleNodeSimpleNode Member
edited October 2012 in General

Personally, I have no use for the additional features KVM offers, I just enjoy watching OSes install from ISOs :/

«1

Comments

  • jhjh Member

    It's the way things are going, e.g. Redhat has dropped support for Xen in favour of it.

  • Its the bomb :)

  • its super epic awesome rock solid ^.^

  • AlexBarakovAlexBarakov Patron Provider, Veteran

    OpenVZ still sells much more than KVM, atleast on my side. KVM seems to be harder to manage as well, but there is a group of people that prefer to use it. Encryption of drives, own kernels, own ISO's and etc. .. Probably there are more benefits as well. Others just buy them, cause everyone claims that KVM is better then OpenVZ, without a particular need of it.

  • @GetKVM_Ash +1 - I love KVM
    @SimpleNode There are templates now for KVM so it's as easy to deploy as Xen or OpenVZ
    @jhadley We are maintaining our own Xen software stack with libvirt support and custom kernels for CentOS 6. It was a bit of a pain to pull it of but it was well worth the effort.

  • SimpleNodeSimpleNode Member
    edited October 2012

    I mean, I personally pay extra for KVM, even though I don't know why. (Never used the addtl features it has over OVZ / Xen)

  • CoreyCorey Member
    edited October 2012

    @SimpleNode said: Personally, I have no use for the additional features KVM offers, I just enjoy watching OSes install from ISOs :/

    More segregation for true virtualization... openvz is still software virtualization. KVM is full hardware virtualization. They each have their own uses. Some things can not run in openvz and need full hardware virtualization.

    Also - wtf I thought you were a provider.... with 'KVM Coming soon' in your signature - yet you don't know why you would sell it.

  • SimpleNodeSimpleNode Member
    edited October 2012

    @Corey I'm just asking why people here prefer KVM. I personally have no use for it, correct.

    I know what KVM is, and have a understanding as to how it works. From what I can tell, most people just prefer KVM, even though their software will run just as well as on OVZ / Xen.

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran
    edited October 2012

    KVM is the full freedom that a lot of people expect from a vps. I run a lot of things in KVM, but I also prefer OpenVZ these days. Took me some time to get there.

  • SimpleNodeSimpleNode Member
    edited October 2012

    From what I can tell, most people don't run custom kernels or their own ISOs, they just like the reassurance that their resources are not being oversold, and that their VPS is running on "real" virtualization

  • SpiritSpirit Member
    edited October 2012

    I don't see any reason to pay even slightly more for KVM as long I can get Xen. I believe than in most cases paying extra for KVM means a bit more PLAYING on beginning (one time setup) and then pretty much same long term usage.
    I am wondering if there's even 5% of KVM vps clients which do something more with KVM than they would with Xen.

  • @SimpleNode said: From what I can tell, most people don't run custom kernels or their own ISOs, they just like the reassurance that their resources are not being oversold, and that their VPS is running on "real" virtualization

    You can oversell RAM and HDD on KVM easily.

  • rchurchrchurch Member
    edited October 2012

    It is very easy to move fully built images with KVM, VMWare and XenHVM. I have moved fully working systems between providers just by editing grub.cfg and editing /etc/fstab and /etc/network/interfaces. Try that with OpenVZ or XenPV.

    In short if you have to move stuff between providers "exactly as is" go with the above 3. You don't have to reinstall and redo you configuration files from scratch. Try virtualizing a physical server with OpenVZ and you'll get the idea.

    OpenVZ is fine if the host nodes are fully under your control, but if you are hosting with others its a no no.

  • @Spencer said: You can oversell RAM and HDD on KVM easily.

    You cant oversell HDD full stop on a SolusVM system so i don't know what gave you that idea. As for RAM, maybe a gig oversold if your lucky, KVM guests tend to utilize the resources at hand, just like an actual server would.

  • dmmcintyre3dmmcintyre3 Member
    edited November 2012

    @rchurch said: Try that with OpenVZ

    OpenVZ migrations from inside the containers are stop services, rsync and reboot.

  • KVM is just that much closer to bare metal - if you are a system administrator, I can't see why you wouldn't prefer it.

    • Install your own base - many OVZ hosts seem to use the same broken templates.
    • Use your distribution's kernel (or roll your own!) - I have no interest running a RHEL kernel in Ubuntu.
    • Move filesystems around (boot Finnix, mount disk, pipe tar over ssh)

    For those of us who are from the days of Slackware on multiple floppies, LFS, and compiling your own kernels, KVM is $HOME.

  • @dmmcintyre3 OpenVZ migrations from inside the containers are stop services, rsync and reboot.

    Can you do that across different provider installations or even different hosts within the same provider?

  • I moved a monitoring VPS from IPXCore to Hostigation that way.

  • love xen and kvm. its just not much xen offers nowadays

  • @adam12 said: For those of us who are from the days of Slackware on multiple floppies, LFS, and compiling your own kernels, KVM is $HOME.

    Easily done with Xen HVM though- and Xen+PV drivers seem more stable/outperform KVM as of yet.

  • I view KVM as a way for providers to charge more.

  • Well, I think to make it clear, we just need to answer this question : "do you need KVM ?". Answer with yes or no and your "real" reason.
    For me, no, a working openvz container is enough for my clients projects and also there are no side effects in my SEO projects...

  • @dmmcintyre I moved a monitoring VPS from IPXCore to Hostigation that way.

    Did they use identical kernels?
    Did you do it from the console or SSH?
    What script do you use to stop all services and do the transfer?

  • Did I mention Ext4? :)

  • AsimAsim Member
    edited November 2012

    @Alex_LiquidHost said: OpenVZ still sells much more than KVM

    probably because OVZ is Cheap?

    Although I do not load my own kernel and do not use any of the features that KVM offers like kernal hooks etc but still, I prefer it because I have a clean OS and not some template sh*t with custom motd/banners which you need to cleanup

    Secondly, tweaking iptables on OpenVZ is not as simple as on KVM

    Lastly, I was discussing performance issues (6mo ago) with a host and it informed me that one container was doing xyz and he killed his processes, I was like can you do that and see the processes, he was like YES so thats not-ok with me.

    OpenVZ = insecure disk, exposed files (to the owner/network admin atleast) and no control over processes .... hence its always a big no-no to me.

    Of course I still own a small bunch of OVZs including but not limited to @Frantech, @SimpleNode @KuJoe etc but im moving away from OVZs

  • rds100rds100 Member
    edited November 2012

    @Asim said: OpenVZ = insecure disk, exposed files (to the owner/network admin atleast) and no control over processes .... hence its always a big no-no to me.

    An admin can also get to your files on KVM if he is motivated enough to do it. Thinking that you are secure just because you are on a KVM VPS is wrong.
    If you want your files to be really secure, get a dedicated box.

  • SimpleNodeSimpleNode Member
    edited November 2012

    mmm. We are working on a script that actually scans /vz/private and flags known malicious files. We can't really do this with KVM (easily).

  • @rds100 I used to think that but with a dedi the provider often has a way to remotely gain access (rescue method)...they can backdoor the boot process etc. I think what @asim is saying is that it's levels of technical competence and motivation. Sure the provider can mount my KVM virtual disk, or even inject into my KVM process (or simply patch the KVM source to provide "easy access" but with ovz, no effort is required to browse my stuff. I'm starting to look into integrity/assurance stuff around 3rd party hosted VMs and I don't anticipate getting a 100% solution (as ultimately he who has hardware access wins), but risk/trust is analogue :)

  • AsimAsim Member
    edited November 2012

    @rds100 what I wanted to say @craigb has already elaborated. I understand you point of view but with OVZ, nothing needs to be done to see/browse files. Its as simple as that.

    Hence I do not trust on OVZ, with KVM at least the provider needs to be shady enough to copy my VM and remount it which requires a bit of work as compared to OVZ containers having a virtual NEON SIGN pointing out the fact that "YES YOU CAN POKE AROUND WITHOUT DOING ANYTHING" :D

  • @Asim you are correct, it is too easy on OpenVZ. On KVM it requires work and expertize.

    My point was that if someone wants your files and is willing to pay me $2M to get them - he will have it, no matter how you try to hide those files ;-)

Sign In or Register to comment.