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
Both because KVM is using it's own kernel.
if i have to choose, which i should choose?
the node only host one KVM and the KVM is under NAT with some ports exposed to public.
If you're not doing both then you shouldnt bother, as the other will still need manual updates and need to be rebooted upon update. Considering the price of KernelCare you'd might as well install it on both...
In terms of exposed risk, then the physical host node if you only want to pay for 1 license is the obvious choice.
You have to accept that you need to reboot the NAT guest when you need to update it though, or just buy 2 licenses.
Host node, then use ubuntu 16.04 live kernel patching in your vm.
thanks for all suggestions
it seem purchasing 2 licenses is the best options, since the VM is storing big mysql databases, im worried to reboot the VM too frequently.
well if you really want to save some money you could just use openvz instead of kvm then you only need to patch 1 kernel, kernelcare supports openvz and openvz is fine for mysql.
Hmm. Isn't live patching natively available in the mainline Linux kernel by now?
https://www.ubuntu.com/server/livepatch
Yep, for 16.04
@AnthonySmith, its dockerized mysql and other images also i do other things that need KVM.
@joepie91, is live patching only available on ubuntu or its available on general linux kernel too?
This post suggests it's in kernel. I'm not sure whether distributions include it as well though, or whether it integrates into any major package management systems yet.
Hostnode for sure, VM if you need it.
Generally VM's restart a lot quicker than the whole server