Linux OS advice for building a SAM-SD
-
@scottalanmiller I only used the Virt-Adapter GUI tool. Where I was having trouble was making KVM see my drive volume on my hardware RAID controller. I then added a network bridge. I was at the point where I was creating a new VM and KMV didn't like my network bridge. Rebooted my KVM host and she wouldn't come out of recovery. I didn't like Hyper-V when I was testing it out a few months ago. Thanks for making me aware of Scale. I will check that out.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Linux OS advice for building a SAM-SD:
words of encouragement to re-direct my focus back to the KVM Hypervisor.
I found KVM to be quite a bit easier than Hyper-V. Did the KVM GUI tools not work for you?
The issue is a bit of the same issue I have with KVM. It's completely build it yourself. (unless you're using Scale). Which means bringing in a gui interface, selecting a dom0 etc etc.
It's a lot to plan and implement from the get-go for someone who is expecting a XenServer or ESXi type solution. Single ISO, install it to the hardware and download a command center of sorts.
If there was a guide on ML of here's a beginners approach to KVM with a full GUI, backups (the whole 9) then I could see more people picking it up to use it.
As it is, it's a , well fedora, or centos or debian or suse, and then you have libvirt or ovirt or the CLI only and then you have . . . .
There needs to be a simple "this is a windows admin (introductory) approach to setting up KVM for production environment, including a GUI and how to get things like ISO repos and backup repo's in place". As I certainly want to test KVM, but I don't want to have to pick every piece and install each.
-
@magicmarker said in Linux OS advice for building a SAM-SD:
Thanks for making me aware of Scale. I will check that out.
Scale is a appliance provider, so you'd be looking at a hardware & software solution. If you're simply looking to test, then you'd be "building" it your self.
-
@magicmarker said in Linux OS advice for building a SAM-SD:
I just want to mention that the KVM Hypervisor does take more than Linux basic knowledge. After @JaredBusch and @scottalanmiller recommended KVM on Fedora for the SAM-SD OS I have been playing with the KVM Hypervisor on a minimal Fedora install. I was able to successfully get a working KVM Hypervisor running. I realize that I've been very spoiled with the ESXi Hypervisor. I will require a more GUI based Hypervisor setup. I played around with the virt-manager which is a nice alternative to the cli for novice Linux users. There is still too much for me to learn with KVM and I never really did find instructions that really spell it out for me. I'm trying not to use VMware ESXi. I'm going to re-visit Hyper-V 2016 standalone with a Fedora Server (with desktop) VM to be my NFS file server. I'm open to any advice or words of encouragement to re-direct my focus back to the KVM Hypervisor.
Really? I've found KVM/libvirt much easier than XS/XAPI. KVM/libvirt has almost NO limits whatsoever, it can run and use any recent piece of hardware, any storage tecnology… any networking stack, of course.
-
@magicmarker said in Linux OS advice for building a SAM-SD:
@scottalanmiller I only used the Virt-Adapter GUI tool. Where I was having trouble was making KVM see my drive volume on my hardware RAID controller. I then added a network bridge. I was at the point where I was creating a new VM and KMV didn't like my network bridge. Rebooted my KVM host and she wouldn't come out of recovery. I didn't like Hyper-V when I was testing it out a few months ago. Thanks for making me aware of Scale. I will check that out.
Hmm... have not done it recently on Fedora. Last time was Ubuntu and all of that was completely automatic.
-
Install Fedora 26
Install virtualization
Install virtual machine manager on a Fedora based desktop (or Fedora based VM on your Windows desktop)Done.
-
@Tim_G Just posted Fedora 26 KVM HTML5 Remote Access with Web-Console via Kimchi. This looks like it could be the answer to using KVM with a GUI interface that doesn't require too much Linux knowledge.
-
@magicmarker said in Linux OS advice for building a SAM-SD:
@scottalanmiller I only used the Virt-Adapter GUI tool. Where I was having trouble was making KVM see my drive volume on my hardware RAID controller. I then added a network bridge. I was at the point where I was creating a new VM and KMV didn't like my network bridge. Rebooted my KVM host and she wouldn't come out of recovery. I didn't like Hyper-V when I was testing it out a few months ago. Thanks for making me aware of Scale. I will check that out.
I assume you're talking about Virt-Manager?
None of this is needed. Out of the box after an install you can select macvtap for the interface instead of NAT. You don't need a full bridge at all.
Now a bridge makes it a little more flexible but only in host/guest communication. You can do an ovs bridge also, but that's more complicated. Seriously, starting out, install Fedora/CentOS, check the hypervisor role, and that's it.
-
@dustinb3403 said in Linux OS advice for building a SAM-SD:
@scottalanmiller said in Linux OS advice for building a SAM-SD:
words of encouragement to re-direct my focus back to the KVM Hypervisor.
I found KVM to be quite a bit easier than Hyper-V. Did the KVM GUI tools not work for you?
The issue is a bit of the same issue I have with KVM. It's completely build it yourself. (unless you're using Scale). Which means bringing in a gui interface, selecting a dom0 etc etc.
It's a lot to plan and implement from the get-go for someone who is expecting a XenServer or ESXi type solution. Single ISO, install it to the hardware and download a command center of sorts.
There really isn't any more to plan/implement. Run ISO for install. Pick hypervisor role. Done.
Virt-Manager runs on the client for a GUI which is just a package install.
With XenServer you need either XenCenter or XenOrchestra. XenCenter requires a Windows machine. XenOrchestra has to be installed with Git. Sure you made a script but that script is the work it takes to install it vs dnf install virt-manager.
The only piece that isnt fully done is backup. And that can be done a few different ways and isn't a single solution for everyone.
-
@stacksofplates The way you are describing it, makes it feel more like a Type 2 Hypervisor. I was attempting to install Fedora as a minimal install and add the KVM role through the cli. I then was able to successfully launch Virt-Manager from a Windows box using Xming and Putty. I was having trouble on the Linux admin side understanding how to add a volumes for VM data storage and how to properly setup the networking within the Virt-Manager which is not documented well. My host has multiple nic's and I'm used to setting up a Virtual Switch.
-
@magicmarker said in Linux OS advice for building a SAM-SD:
@stacksofplates The way you are describing it, makes it feel more like a Type 2 Hypervisor.
It what sense?
-
@magicmarker said in Linux OS advice for building a SAM-SD:
@stacksofplates The way you are describing it, makes it feel more like a Type 2 Hypervisor. I was attempting to install Fedora as a minimal install and add the KVM role through the cli. I then was able to successfully launch Virt-Manager from a Windows box using Xming and Putty. I was having trouble on the Linux admin side understanding how to add a volumes for VM data storage and how to properly setup the networking within the Virt-Manager which is not documented well. My host has multiple nic's and I'm used to setting up a Virtual Switch.
it's all type 1, there is no type 2 for KVM. Default volume for guests is /var/lib/libvirt/images. You can literally just create a directory and use that as a volume. There is nothing special for ISOs or guest images at all. For multiple NICs you can just pick which one it should be using. So VM1 can use macvtap on em2 and VM2 can use macvtap on em3 (or whatever the NIC is called on your system).
-
@scottalanmiller said in Linux OS advice for building a SAM-SD:
It what sense?
I'm sure it feels like type-2 in the same sense that everybody else gets confused about Hyper-V as a role. If you're installing something after the OS install, it feels like it's "on top"
-
@scottalanmiller said in Linux OS advice for building a SAM-SD:
@magicmarker said in Linux OS advice for building a SAM-SD:
@stacksofplates The way you are describing it, makes it feel more like a Type 2 Hypervisor.
It what sense?
Installing the Linux Server OS with a desktop, then adding the KVM package. It reminds of installing Windows Server OS, and then adding the Hypervisor role. Maybe I'm making this harder on myself. I was doing a Fedora minimal install (no pretty GUI) and installing the KVM packages via the cli to keep the overhead to a minimum. If I were to install Fedora with a desktop package like Gnome I would probably have an easier time working with KVM.
-
@magicmarker said in Linux OS advice for building a SAM-SD:
Installing the Linux Server OS with a desktop, then adding the KVM package. It reminds of installing Windows Server OS, and then adding the Hypervisor role.
Right, The Hyper-V process was modeled after the Xen process. All type-1 hypervisors installed this way (until recently ESXi changed and is the first to have a different process after a decade of doing it this way.) This is how type-1 has always been installed.
-
Why the preference of Fedora over CentOS. It seems like you'd want the more stable release cycle for your dom0.
-
@kelly Both @scottalanmiller and @JaredBusch recommended Fedora.
-
@magicmarker said in Linux OS advice for building a SAM-SD:
@kelly Both @scottalanmiller and @JaredBusch recommended Fedora.
Yeah, that is why I have my question. I respect both of their opinions, but they have been wrong in the past.
-
@kelly said in Linux OS advice for building a SAM-SD:
Why the preference of Fedora over CentOS. It seems like you'd want the more stable release cycle for your dom0.
That's one theory. I don't believe that CentOS is more stable. I've not seen that. Stability is certainly of concern, but does being "old" really constitute more stability? I think that it used to, long ago when technology was quite different, but I'm not convinced that it does today. CentOS is stable in terms of "package versions", but that's not the same as stable. Fedora gets more updates, more advances, more security, more quickly than CentOS does. All things that you want in your hypervisor.
-
Fedora has a better upgrade path as well. Moving from CentOS X to CentOS Y tends to be high risk and relatively painful. Moving from Fedora X to Fedora Y happens many times more often, but tends to be painless and trivial.
