dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng
-
I see you got dual threads on this....
-
@StuartJordan said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
I see you got dual threads on this....
Separate threads for separate conversations with separate people.
-
@DustinB3403 said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@StuartJordan said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
I see you got dual threads on this....
Separate threads for separate conversations with separate people.
Ah I See ,fair enough
-
@DustinB3403 said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng?
Because I want to
-
@dbeato said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@DustinB3403 said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng?
Because I want to
Fair enough lol. But kind of a conversation killer.
-
@DustinB3403 said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@dbeato said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@DustinB3403 said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng?
Because I want to
Fair enough lol. But kind of a conversation killer.
No, in all fairness it is because they were old HyperV 2012 Servers and I already had XCP-Ng implemented for a POOL of 7 servers. So I added those workloads from a couple Hyperv Servers to the already existing XCP-ng. I essentially didn't need additional hosts running outdated and consuming more power.
-
@DustinB3403 said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@StuartJordan said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
could be for the reason that Xenserver has changed how features work and is more restricted now.
Citrix changing their license is their choice. I get the reasons for many people dumping it.
@StuartJordan said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
XCP-NG is Xenserver without anything disabled.
This is wrong, XCP-ng is the last open source version of XenServer, with numerous changes that are not at all in XenServer. It is it's own product now.
I perhaps worded that wrong, yeah it is a separate product now but it's original code base was from Xenserver.
And they did disable features in 7.3 -
@StuartJordan said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@DustinB3403 said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@StuartJordan said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
could be for the reason that Xenserver has changed how features work and is more restricted now.
Citrix changing their license is their choice. I get the reasons for many people dumping it.
@StuartJordan said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
XCP-NG is Xenserver without anything disabled.
This is wrong, XCP-ng is the last open source version of XenServer, with numerous changes that are not at all in XenServer. It is it's own product now.
I perhaps worded that wrong, yeah it is a separate product now but it's original code base was from Xenserver.
And they did disable features in 7.3That's more accurate, and when Citrix disabled features, that is what spurred @olivier and his team to create XCP-ng (from XenServer) and to rebrand with XCP-ng. Which XCP is the first iteration I believe of XAPI, which later was branded to XenServer.
IDK the exact history of the naming. But I'm pretty sure it all started with Xen, turned into XCP, was rebranded XenServer, and is now XenServer and XCP-ng as separate products.
-
@DustinB3403 the naming I find a bit weird XCP-NG....not as freindly on the tongue as xenserver lol.
-
They have done great with it though, full praise to them for starting that project.
-
@StuartJordan said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@DustinB3403 the naming I find a bit weird XCP-NG....not as freindly on the tongue as xenserver lol.
Well the name is derived from XCP (which was the original XenServer name iirc).
NG is I believe for Next Generation (or New maybe).
-
@dbeato said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@DustinB3403 said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@dbeato said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@DustinB3403 said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng?
Because I want to
Fair enough lol. But kind of a conversation killer.
No, in all fairness it is because they were old HyperV 2012 Servers and I already had XCP-Ng implemented for a POOL of 7 servers. So I added those workloads from a couple Hyperv Servers to the already existing XCP-ng. I essentially didn't need additional hosts running outdated and consuming more power.
So you decommissioned some old hyper-v servers into your more up to date XCP-ng environment. That's a good reason. Simplifies your stack, removes hardware, saves energy.
-
@DustinB3403 said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@dbeato said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@DustinB3403 said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@dbeato said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@DustinB3403 said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng?
Because I want to
Fair enough lol. But kind of a conversation killer.
No, in all fairness it is because they were old HyperV 2012 Servers and I already had XCP-Ng implemented for a POOL of 7 servers. So I added those workloads from a couple Hyperv Servers to the already existing XCP-ng. I essentially didn't need additional hosts running outdated and consuming more power.
So you decommissioned some old hyper-v servers into your more up to date XCP-ng environment. That's a good reason. Simplifies your stack, removes hardware, saves energy.
Yes.
-
It's not really fair to call xcp-ng something completely "new".
When Citrix releases a new xenserver version (or Citrix Hypervisor as it is to be called now) xcp-ng team works to build it but without the non-free parts and with some of their own additions (Gluster support, ZFS driver etc). In the future it might change but it's really Citrix that does the heavy lifting in addition to the upstream projects. If you're not using any of the new xcp-ng only features, you are really running on the same proven source code as the Citrix product.
Personally I like the xencenter gui (xcp-ng center) for management and think it is superior to the KVM options. We have been putting xcp-ng on a bunch of new servers. We'll see what happens in the coming two, three years.
-
@Pete-S I've been a fan of the GUI when using xencenter in the past. I believe personally it's an outdated way to manage a hypervisor these days, especially with web based management, which is obviously not platform dependent.
-
@Pete-S no one claimed it was completely new.
It is a fork.
It is supposedly going to be continually updating from Citrix.
It has components completely new to it.
Aside from all that technical detail, which I trust though, the thing I don’t trust is the business model.
-
@JaredBusch I agree, Olivier's business model is the difficult part to look past.
-
@DustinB3403 said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@JaredBusch I agree, Olivier's business model is the difficult part to look past.
XOA was a great tool from what I could tell with all the conversations here. But the price structure was something discussed quite a bit.
-
@JaredBusch said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@DustinB3403 said in dbeato why are you migrating from Hyper-V to XCP-ng:
@JaredBusch I agree, Olivier's business model is the difficult part to look past.
XOA was a great tool from what I could tell with all the conversations here. But the price structure was something discussed quite a bit.
Which is why I exclusively use XOCE. $6000 a year isn't cheap for the highest teir of support and functionality.
