For Fedora you can just do sudo dnf install vagrant-libvirt

1 .So can ovirt be run with only 2 nodes? 2. With those 2 nodes, do you need a separate shared storage device for live migrations, etc, or can you have local storage (Like "vsan")?

@FATeknollogee said in oVirt Host Choices for Production: @EddieJennings I would start by using oVirt Node (it's based on CentOS), it's the simplest, least hassled way of setting up. Yeah, they have their own Node deployer, I'd generally just use that.

@Obsolesce said in Client-side Virtualization - CompTIA A+ 220-1001 Prof Messer: @scottalanmiller said in Client-side Virtualization - CompTIA A+ 220-1001 Prof Messer: @Obsolesce said in Client-side Virtualization - CompTIA A+ 220-1001 Prof Messer: @IRJ said in Client-side Virtualization - CompTIA A+ 220-1001 Prof Messer: Who would license Windows Server to run an inefficient web server? Nobody in their right mind would do that. Again, like Scott, why add in things that were never part of any point? Let me refresh the point: Scott originally compared full blown Windows Desktop GUI plus web browser and other app RAM usage, to a minimal gui-less Linux server RAM usage. This was what I was arguing against, that the comparison was not fair and was not set up correctly. Except I was specifically making the comparison on use case, not on technology. So the bases for your correction doesn't make sense. I pointed out that one was assumed to have a GUI and be used graphically, and one was assumed to be a headless server. So my comparison wasn't Windows vs Linux, it was use case vs. use case. What use case comparison involves Windows GUI + web browsing versus GUI-less Linux minimal install? Lots. Like when you are using RDS versus using a PBX. It's that we are comparing different use cases is the point. Not comparing the same use case in two different places.

It only seems like private isn't available because no one does that. Why wants private cloud? no one, not really. It's essentially a dumb idea. It basically exists for crazy people and governments where "good decision making" isn't a factor. But hybrid is ruled out in both of those cases either because it doesn't support the "crazy" or the legal government requirement.

@Francesco-Provino said in virt-manager for Windows: @scottalanmiller you don’t want a GUI on the virtualization host, ever. Just spin a VM with virt-manager and launch it on your local machine with xming or one of the other solutions in the other comments. Right, bypassing Windows can be an option, but it's a crappy one. But I got it working directly on Windows, so no need for a heavy VM for one app.

@scottalanmiller I was considering rolling them back to last night as a last-ditch scenario is all fails since it is on Veeam and I have a Full from last night.

@JaredBusch said in Conatainers (Docker) vs VMs - When and Why?: @Obsolesce said in Conatainers (Docker) vs VMs - When and Why?: Are there many use cases in the SMB outside of Dev? Not even in dev really for the SMB. Just use a single VM to do the work. SMB rarely needs to scale. Other than as you stated, the solution is presented that way. Like UNMS. Even enterprise rarely need to scale that way. It's more for hosting companies than anything.

@Vlinderbeest said in Infrastructure Needed for Hypervisor Cluster: @scottalanmiller said in Infrastructure Needed for Hypervisor Cluster: Clustering is done when the cost of clustering is low versus the risk of not clustering. I would change that slightly to Clustering is done when the cost of clustering is low versus the cost of not clustering. A risk is always a cost, but some costs are not risks. For example taking down a hypervisor for maintenance vs moving guests to another node and taking down a free node for maintenance. Sure, using risk cost vs investment cost as cost v cost is a perfect valid way to look at it. I use that all the time in the opposite way. You can say that risk is a cost. Or conversely, you can look at the clustering cost up front as essentially a "financial event" similar to an outage.

@JaredBusch said in Dashrender why did you migrate to Hyper-V from XenServer: The XCP-NG team is a team that had a horrible business model that they were trying to implement around XenServer (XOA). Great concept, poor business model. I wish them well but they are fighting a few things... Citrix couldn't make any real money even when they charged more and people were taking the product seriously. Last time I checked they were just replacing some management components and packaging some storage stuff. They are not investing in upstream and there's a lot of... changes coming in hardware that are going to require non-trivial investments for hypervisors to remain relevant. The real problem with Xen is upstream investment is drying up. Citrix has pulled back, Amazon and other cloud providers have moved on to KVM, SuSE doesn't even market virtualization (SAP HANA support, containers, OS is as close to bare metal as they get). Outside of some people in ARM/automotive virtualization I haven't seen anyone picking it up for net new projects. In the enterprise Oracle is the only champion of it these days. KVM won the open source hypervisor war (although at this point does anyone really care?)

Can you reassign disks between VMs yet? The hot add disks was a huge pain before. I couldn't believe I wasn't able to do that.

@stacksofplates said in Kvm network troubleshooting: @scottalanmiller said in Kvm network troubleshooting: Your server has an IP address of 192.168.122.1? Is that correct? Nothing wrong with that technically, but it would be exceptionally unusual. That's almost always the gateway address. What is the address of your gateway? That's libvirts virtual bridge address for the NAT network. Oh, duh, I missed the bridge. Carry on.

@atahaynah said in Cockpit: @DustinB3403 it was stopped But fortunately i got it resolved i had to downgrade one packege and after that restarted the service and it worked What did you downgrade to fix the issue?

@scottalanmiller RHV now, after a rebrand in 2016-ish

@Obsolesce said in How do you choose what Linux Distro to use for a project?: @JaredBusch said in How do you choose what Linux Distro to use for a project?: @Obsolesce said in How do you choose what Linux Distro to use for a project?: @DustinB3403 said in How do you choose what Linux Distro to use for a project?: @JaredBusch said in How do you choose what Linux Distro to use for a project?: @DustinB3403 said in How do you choose what Linux Distro to use for a project?: @JaredBusch said in How do you choose what Linux Distro to use for a project?: No, that is not valid. WTF is even “mainstream”? main·stream /ˈmānˌstrēm/ noun I know how it is defined. But how are you claiming which ones are mainstream. Because there is only subjective evidence to support any of your wild ass bullshit claim. Mint is Mainstream to many. It is old and nasty and not something I would ever use. Ubuntu is a steaming pile of shit that only has popularity among "developers" because it was "popular" as a desktop OS. Okay ass. You know what my intention is and was when using the term Mainstream. So get off your horse and onto the dildo, cause you need to sit and spin for a while. Completely unwarranted reply from you, because the use and intention of "mainstream" is useless no matter how you try to swing it... HOWEVER, I LMAO so hard at this. Maybe if it is studded? For that extra oomph? Definitely studded. Only way to go. Mangolassi.it - Always go for a flaming laugh!

So following on from the Other thread. Looks like i'm heading to the Install KVM, setup a Linux VM and use that to manage the KVM server from that.

@EddieJennings said in Typical virtualization host server config?: @Pete-S said in Typical virtualization host server config?: We've calculated guesstimated 8GB RAM and 50 GB SSD storage per VM on average. How did you come up with your guesstimate? Do you have some workloads in production right now that you'd be virtualizing with whatever host your configure and buy? Yes, actually we have the hardware now but it hasn't been configured completely yet. We are still figuring things out. The workloads are running on physical servers (Windows) and it's latency that is our primary concern, not capacity. We are moving the applications to linux and making them multi-tenant and horizontally scalable at the same time. So that's why we are guesstimating based on the config of the physical servers.

@FATeknollogee the install itself has been covered too many times to mention Maybe if he runs into a specific issue and solves it, that would be a good thing to share

Conversely, I over-allocated vCPUs across several VMs (ESXi) when I was new to type 1 hypervisors and ran into performance issues associated with high CPU ready times. After scaling down, performance improved dramatically.

@StorageNinja said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On: @Dashrender said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On: The question is - why is the quality so bad? Isn't the process supposed to catch bad quality? Their process is consider the windows insider group (extreme power users) to be a good enough replacement for proper QE teams, and writing automated build tests. Right, the new process isn't to catch bad things, it's actually to see bad things as "not all that bad." Presumably because a shift from viewing their products as being for business to being for entertainment. Remember when Windows 95 was a key tool for businesses, but by Windows 98 they had made sure to put a "for entertainment purposes only" label on the product to make sure no one confused it with something that was intended for business use? I feel like that's where they are now. At least internally, no one is really thinking of this as a business tool.

@scottalanmiller said in KVM with Cockpit on Fedora 29 Network Type Options Greyed Out: When building a new VM using Cockpit's web interface to KVM on Fedora 29, the Network Type option leaves most options like Bridge to LAN, Generic ethernet connections, and Direct attachment greyed out. Anyone know why? Did you try with network manager? Any missing package?

Too bad KVM is not available on Mac then I can move from using Virtualbox.

@obsolesce said in Fedora 28 KVM Cockpit Doesn't Show All VMs: Everyone is always waiting for someone else to report bugs and issues, that's why they take so long to get fixed. Not as bad with FOSS, but a big reason with MS for example. But I don't know that it is a bug. It's reasonable that it might be, but it's just one possibility.

@stacksofplates said in Remote management of VMs hosted in colocation: @dashrender said in Remote management of VMs hosted in colocation: @stacksofplates said in Remote management of VMs hosted in colocation: @scottalanmiller said in Remote management of VMs hosted in colocation: @stacksofplates said in Remote management of VMs hosted in colocation: @scottalanmiller said in Remote management of VMs hosted in colocation: @eddiejennings said in Remote management of VMs hosted in colocation: Allowing an SSH connection to the managementVM from the Internet I have not tried this approach yet, and it appears more risky than the Screen Connect approach, since SSH to that VM would be open to the Internet. Unless I'm missing some benefit to this approach, I'll not be using it. Use a strong key, lock to your IP. Very safe. Add Fail2Ban, of course. Or add Salt and open/close based on need so it doesn't stay open. Fail2ban doesn't work with keys. But it would work normally with people attacking using non-keys, would it not? Or am I missing something about what it would do? Why would you not require keys? Not making them mandatory defeats the purpose of using them. I think he means - if a hacker is trying to use a password on a system setup to only allow keys - the fail2ban will block those users, or won't it? No. It's dropped before fail2ban even sees it. Oh, makes sense. There is no "attempt" like with a password, it is "already blocked."

@flaxking said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers: @scottalanmiller said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers: @flaxking said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers: What you're talking about is one aspect of part of implementing DevOps that is often misinterpreted to mean the whole of it. And yes, it is stupid to call that DevOps. That's just Ops using different tools. I see it as the opposite. Patrick's core DevOps... "Thanks to the devopsdays conference, the idea of devops seems to live on. While talking with other people about it, I realize that it is difficult to frame it within the current IT landscape. At lot of the ideas are coming from different kinds of emerging technologies (T) and process management (P) approaches. For me the two most important observations are: there is a increase in feedback loops between business, all parts of the delivery process and operations thanks to this feedback loops we increase the quality and speed up the flow" This is the core of DevOps, not well described, but pretty clearly about IT, not development. This is the core. Very, very loosely defined to the point of useless, sure. Then things like DevOps talking dev itself is the extra, the tack on later. It's not "part of" devops, any more than it is of any operations. And just how operations doesn't cease to exist without developers, neither does DevOps. I believe everything on that page is all meant to be within the context of companies doing development. But I agree, the core of DevOps is about Ops and Business practices. However, I firmly believe the name DevOps comes from Ops and Development working together, and thus the reason why discussions of DevOps implementation specifics centre around companies doing software development. Though just based on that page, I could see why someone could still take a different view. However, I consider The DevOps Handbook to be the definitive source, rather than notes on the initial discussions. I think doing that makes DevOps a pointless, useless concept. Hopefully that's not what he intended. As an ops practice, it has tremendous value. As a merger of dev and ops, it's just bluster.