Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On
-
@StuartJordan so just a general lack of polish on the platform as a whole.
-
@StuartJordan said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
@DustinB3403 - Quick Install with no fuss, snapshot and snapshot schedules, backup with Xen Orchestra.. just nice and easy to use with no fuss just like a hypervisor should be.
I've used KVM with Virt Manager and remember it had issues sometimes connecting with Spice or Vnc...just didn't seem quite as polished in my eyes...
Would you still use it without Xen Orchestra?
I asked because I feel Xen Orchestra has a big part in making an individual to use XenServer/XCP-ng. -
@black3dynamite said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
Would you still use it without Xen Orchestra?
I asked because I feel Xen Orchestra has a big part in making an individual to use XenServer/XCP-ng.I would definitely not use XCP-ng without XO. I would probably use Hyper-V and Veeam otherwise.
I want to try KVM, but I don't have time to figure out the backup stuff right now. Maybe it's time I switch my home lab over to KVM.
-
@black3dynamite said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
@StuartJordan said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
@DustinB3403 - Quick Install with no fuss, snapshot and snapshot schedules, backup with Xen Orchestra.. just nice and easy to use with no fuss just like a hypervisor should be.
I've used KVM with Virt Manager and remember it had issues sometimes connecting with Spice or Vnc...just didn't seem quite as polished in my eyes...
Would you still use it without Xen Orchestra?
I asked because I feel Xen Orchestra has a big part in making an individual to use XenServer/XCP-ng.I think a lot of people wouldn't use it, if XO didn't exist or didn't have an open source option to go along with it.
Edit: And I say this because, and only because you then have to mix in something else, like Veeam to create your backups. It's not unheard of, just more complex.
-
Granted using XO is adding something into the mix, but XAPI is in addition to the xen hypervisor. So there is already a lot of things that are mixed in that you've accepted.
At least with XO, you get a management interface, backups and recovery, monitoring and notifications all in one.
-
Which of course, simplifies the amount of decisions you are forced to make.
What do I need to do to backup? XO
How do I manage my hypervisor and VM? XO
How do I update the hypervisor? XOMultiple answers in a single platform. Which of course doesn't limit you from using other options. But its the logical and direct one that should be made.
-
Yep don't see any issue with using XO..it has a clean interface.
even installing XO after XCP-NG is quicker than setting up Hyper-V outside of a domain. -
@bnrstnr said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
@black3dynamite said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
Would you still use it without Xen Orchestra?
I asked because I feel Xen Orchestra has a big part in making an individual to use XenServer/XCP-ng.I would definitely not use XCP-ng without XO. I would probably use Hyper-V and Veeam otherwise.
I want to try KVM, but I don't have time to figure out the backup stuff right now. Maybe it's time I switch my home lab over to KVM.
Before all the changes with XenServer, I had no problem using XenServer with XenCenter for what I needed. I actually like how quick I got use to using it and the cli compare to my first experience with Hyper-V and KVM.
Backups are always hot-topic with hypervisors. I don't really have issue using Agentless or agent-based backups.
-
@black3dynamite said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
@bnrstnr said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
@black3dynamite said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
Would you still use it without Xen Orchestra?
I asked because I feel Xen Orchestra has a big part in making an individual to use XenServer/XCP-ng.I would definitely not use XCP-ng without XO. I would probably use Hyper-V and Veeam otherwise.
I want to try KVM, but I don't have time to figure out the backup stuff right now. Maybe it's time I switch my home lab over to KVM.
Before all the changes with XenServer, I had no problem using XenServer with XenCenter for what I needed. I actually like how quick I got use to using it and the cli compare to my first experience with Hyper-V and KVM.
Backups are always hot-topic with hypervisors. I don't really have issue using Agentless or agent-based backups.
I was in the same exact boat. I was using Unitrends agent-based backups with XenServer, and XenCenter for management. It worked pretty well. I thought this setup was better (for me) than Hyper-V at the time.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
much wide spread confusion exists around Hyper-V and to a lesser extent, ESXi products - primarily caused by their licensing. This aspect of them, which is their most complex piece, is the piece that nearly everyone completely overlooks when discussing comparative complexity.
Bingo!
Yes. KVM have matured alot especially when it comes to ease of install and OS bundling. and best of all does not tie or link with any additional crap.
But folks that can live without additional crap cause they are taught that you cant do Hypervisor without it this and this and that. For small and medium you only care about flexibility and licensing, and for backups simply backup the data within the VMs, you are not large enough to purchase all the storage for VM level BU
-
@black3dynamite said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
@bnrstnr said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
@black3dynamite said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
Would you still use it without Xen Orchestra?
I asked because I feel Xen Orchestra has a big part in making an individual to use XenServer/XCP-ng.I would definitely not use XCP-ng without XO. I would probably use Hyper-V and Veeam otherwise.
I want to try KVM, but I don't have time to figure out the backup stuff right now. Maybe it's time I switch my home lab over to KVM.
Before all the changes with XenServer, I had no problem using XenServer with XenCenter for what I needed. I actually like how quick I got use to using it and the cli compare to my first experience with Hyper-V and KVM.
Backups are always hot-topic with hypervisors. I don't really have issue using Agentless or agent-based backups.
Yes, either are fine. But the religious fervor to only consider one makes no sense, but logically has arisen from vendors promoting that in the same way that FreeNAS promoted ZFS, because it's an easy way to make one little trivial sounding false requirement create a cascade of requirements later.
-
@StuartJordan said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
Yep don't see any issue with using XO..it has a clean interface.
even installing XO after XCP-NG is quicker than setting up Hyper-V outside of a domain.Agreed. Not quite as easy as a basic KVM install IMHO, but easier than a more complex KVM install. And both are way easier than Hyper-V or VMware ESXi once you have to figure out licensing.
-
@StuartJordan said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
Yep don't see any issue with using XO..it has a clean interface.
even installing XO after XCP-NG is quicker than setting up Hyper-V outside of a domain.Lack of Linux support, and purely community-driven project.
Well but Linux is a community-driven project.. oh shut the fkup conflicting internal voice.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
@StuartJordan said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
Yep don't see any issue with using XO..it has a clean interface.
even installing XO after XCP-NG is quicker than setting up Hyper-V outside of a domain.Agreed. Not quite as easy as a basic KVM install IMHO, but easier than a more complex KVM install. And both are way easier than Hyper-V or VMware ESXi once you have to figure out licensing.
By Basic KVM install, @scottalanmiller means literally just installing Fedora with the Virtualization Server role checkbox enabled and nothing beyond that at all. Maybe Cockpit option as well.
But take nothing else as being included with a "basic KVM install".
-
@Emad-R said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
Lack of Linux support, and purely community-driven project.
Well but Linux is a community-driven project.. oh shut the fkup conflicting internal voice.What do you mean "lack of linux support?" XO has commercial support and community support.
XCP-ng, commercial support is coming, or you just use XenServer which is literally XCP-ng with the Citrix licensing intact.
-
Basic KVM install would be with virt-manager for management and being a fedora noob it took me much longer than I would have liked to figure out what I needed and how to install it. And Fedora's graphical installer wouldn't work without command line options.
Xenserver or Xcp-ng for the hypervisor was much quicker and straight-forward to install. Xencenter is super-easy to get going with - if you are already set up with Windows.
So for ease of setup xenserver or xcp-ng wins easily in my opinion. I also think that for ease of basic administration xencenter wins easily - if you have a windows os to run it on.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
@scottalanmiller said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
@StuartJordan said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
Yep don't see any issue with using XO..it has a clean interface.
even installing XO after XCP-NG is quicker than setting up Hyper-V outside of a domain.Agreed. Not quite as easy as a basic KVM install IMHO, but easier than a more complex KVM install. And both are way easier than Hyper-V or VMware ESXi once you have to figure out licensing.
By Basic KVM install, @scottalanmiller means literally just installing Fedora with the Virtualization Server role checkbox enabled and nothing beyond that at all. Maybe Cockpit option as well.
But take nothing else as being included with a "basic KVM install".
Correct, only the stuff you need to get up and running, make your VMs, and go to production. There was some talk of cloning and stuff, but honestly, lots of SMBs don't use that either.
I'm not sure what all this extra stuff is people assume is needed in the SMB, and we've beaten the horse that backups are not potentially to be included here as for most people, they aren't applicable.
Cockpit is there by default, no effort there.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
Cockpit is there by default, no effort there.
Don't you need to install an additional cockpit package to manage KVM? I'm legitimately asking because I don't know. Not trying to be snarky lol
-
@bnrstnr said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
@scottalanmiller said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
Cockpit is there by default, no effort there.
Don't you need to install an additional cockpit package to manage KVM?
Yes, one package. But not Cockpit itself.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
Cockpit is there by default, no effort there.
Only since Fedora 27 or 28. Does it include all the correct modules by default when KVM server (or whatever the line says) is chosen during the setup?
As I never install that way, I have no idea. But that is a personal choice and unrelated to the simlicity of the KVM setup.
