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:
@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:
@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:
@stacksofplates 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:
@stacksofplates 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:
KVM with Cockpit is fully integrated and is all included in one system. No deploying something additional,
This is not true. Cockpit is lacking quite a few features that require either cli or something like Virt-Manager.
That's why I pointed out for more advanced installs you need that. But for the most basic, you do not. You can get up and running with nothing but Cockpit.
It's lacking basic features like cloning and snapshots. That's not advanced.
Okay, that makes sense, but for a basic "up and running" those are a later feature. Not part of the initial setup, which is all that I was saying.
I wouldn't qualify that as advanced. Backups out of the box is pretty high on my list of "OK I have this VM, how do I back it up" list.
Backups are simply out of scope completely, those are not part of any hypervisor. Clones and other under the hood features required to be handled by the hypervisor, while a grey area still, are way more "part of a running system."
But backups are definitely out of bounds for comparison, especially as for the SMB market, most shops come to virtualization with backups already in place that are unaffected by the virtualization.
This is complete bullcrap. Have you ever virtualized a client and the last thought they've ever had as you were walking out the door is "how do we backup and protect our new system?"
Not the slightest BS. It only seems that way if you believe that all backups must be agentless. Outside of that niche, but vocal world, to the rest of us backups have no direct connection to the virtualization process. We have a backup process, but it isn't affected by the virtualization unless we decide to switch and move to agentless.
Of course this is bullcrap, if the client isn't asking "do we need to do something different" with any hypervisor then they aren't thinking about the entire picture.
Agentless isn't the factor I'm sticking on. It's how do I create a complete system, agentless, agent based (some new magic), management interface scaling, migration etc.
-
@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:
@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:
@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:
@stacksofplates 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:
@stacksofplates 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:
KVM with Cockpit is fully integrated and is all included in one system. No deploying something additional,
This is not true. Cockpit is lacking quite a few features that require either cli or something like Virt-Manager.
That's why I pointed out for more advanced installs you need that. But for the most basic, you do not. You can get up and running with nothing but Cockpit.
It's lacking basic features like cloning and snapshots. That's not advanced.
Okay, that makes sense, but for a basic "up and running" those are a later feature. Not part of the initial setup, which is all that I was saying.
I wouldn't qualify that as advanced. Backups out of the box is pretty high on my list of "OK I have this VM, how do I back it up" list.
Backups are simply out of scope completely, those are not part of any hypervisor. Clones and other under the hood features required to be handled by the hypervisor, while a grey area still, are way more "part of a running system."
But backups are definitely out of bounds for comparison, especially as for the SMB market, most shops come to virtualization with backups already in place that are unaffected by the virtualization.
This is complete bullcrap. Have you ever virtualized a client and the last thought they've ever had as you were walking out the door is "how do we backup and protect our new system?"
Not the slightest BS. It only seems that way if you believe that all backups must be agentless. Outside of that niche, but vocal world, to the rest of us backups have no direct connection to the virtualization process. We have a backup process, but it isn't affected by the virtualization unless we decide to switch and move to agentless.
Of course this is bullcrap, if the client isn't asking "do we need to do something different" with any hypervisor then they aren't thinking about the entire picture.
Agentless isn't the factor I'm sticking on. It's how do I create a complete system, agentless, agent based (some new magic), management interface scaling, migration etc.
It is. None of those things need to be thought about unless you are making changes outside of the discussion. Any pre-existing system from the physical world, anything handled by the system, is still handled and not part of the virtualization. You are simply stuck on an association that doesn't really exist.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
Agentless isn't the factor I'm sticking on. It's how do I create a complete system, agentless, agent based (some new magic), management interface scaling, migration etc.
Complete system includes everything. SO many things that aren't virtualization. There is no end to what we'd have to consider under that scope.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
@DustinB3403 said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
If Cockpit had functionality "export a backup to <insert remote>" right there I wouldn't be as I have been. Because, you need something additional.
Who else has that command?
Hyper-V Server does have WSB semi built in, it's an additional feature you need to enable. After that it's simple commands or remotely via the GUI.
But why export backup? Backups should already be off the host...
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
@DustinB3403 said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
Agentless isn't the factor I'm sticking on. It's how do I create a complete system, agentless, agent based (some new magic), management interface scaling, migration etc.
Complete system includes everything. SO many things that aren't virtualization. There is no end to what we'd have to consider under that scope.
You are now mixing the guest OS and the virtual hardware it runs on. I'm specifically discussing a complete hypervisor stack.
What is the:
- Hypervisor?
- Backup method
- Restoration procedure
Among about a million other talking points, that while small things, still need to be understood.
-
@Obsolesce said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
But why export backup? Backups should already be off the host...
That is a separate conversation entirely.
-
@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:
@DustinB3403 said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
Agentless isn't the factor I'm sticking on. It's how do I create a complete system, agentless, agent based (some new magic), management interface scaling, migration etc.
Complete system includes everything. SO many things that aren't virtualization. There is no end to what we'd have to consider under that scope.
You are now mixing the guest OS and the virtual hardware it runs on. I'm specifically discussing a complete hypervisor stack.
What is the:
- Hypervisor?
- Backup method
- Restoration procedure
Among about a million other talking points, that while small things, still need to be understood.
Because to @scottalanmiller backups have nothing to do with the hypervisor.
-
@JaredBusch said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics 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:
@DustinB3403 said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
Agentless isn't the factor I'm sticking on. It's how do I create a complete system, agentless, agent based (some new magic), management interface scaling, migration etc.
Complete system includes everything. SO many things that aren't virtualization. There is no end to what we'd have to consider under that scope.
You are now mixing the guest OS and the virtual hardware it runs on. I'm specifically discussing a complete hypervisor stack.
What is the:
- Hypervisor?
- Backup method
- Restoration procedure
Among about a million other talking points, that while small things, still need to be understood.
Because to @scottalanmiller backups have nothing to do with the hypervisor.
Correct, they are their own thing. Just like the operating systems you run on top of the hypervisor are their own thing. Like everything in IT, they work together, but the switches, routers, backups,, are their own things, not "parts of the hypervisors."
Unless you have Scale that includes it.
-
@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:
@DustinB3403 said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
Agentless isn't the factor I'm sticking on. It's how do I create a complete system, agentless, agent based (some new magic), management interface scaling, migration etc.
Complete system includes everything. SO many things that aren't virtualization. There is no end to what we'd have to consider under that scope.
You are now mixing the guest OS and the virtual hardware it runs on. I'm specifically discussing a complete hypervisor stack.
What is the:
- Hypervisor?
- Backup method
- Restoration procedure
Among about a million other talking points, that while small things, still need to be understood.
I backup and restore workloads, not platforms. I think confusing the infrastructure to run workloads on with the workloads themselves actually undermines that planning process.
Especially in a world where you might not be all on one hypervisor. What happens if you have to include cloud, physical, colo, and on premises hypervisors all in a single strategy?
-
@Obsolesce 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:
@DustinB3403 said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
If Cockpit had functionality "export a backup to <insert remote>" right there I wouldn't be as I have been. Because, you need something additional.
Who else has that command?
Hyper-V Server does have WSB semi built in, it's an additional feature you need to enable. After that it's simple commands or remotely via the GUI.
But why export backup? Backups should already be off the host...
Well, the exporting is what turns a snapshot into a backup, in a sense.
-
What does backing up a workload mean to you?
I backup everything so I can restore to whatever, whenever. That is my workload. Whatever gets me back to operational, hypervisor excluded.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
What does backing up a workload mean to you?
I backup everything so I can restore to whatever, whenever. That is my workload. Whatever gets me back to operational, hypervisor excluded.
Workload is "what is presented to the end user."
With your strategy, let's say your hardware fails, your hypervisor is gone, company decides to restore to a cloud location. What's your restore strategy?
When using agents, this is normally really easy. It's the same as any other restore. For those doing agentless, there are options, but it becomes less obvious.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
@DustinB3403 said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
What does backing up a workload mean to you?
I backup everything so I can restore to whatever, whenever. That is my workload. Whatever gets me back to operational, hypervisor excluded.
Workload is "what is presented to the end user."
With your strategy, let's say your hardware fails, your hypervisor is gone, company decides to restore to a cloud location. What's your restore strategy?
When using agents, this is normally really easy. It's the same as any other restore. For those doing agentless, there are options, but it becomes less obvious.
From the user perspective, they don't care what is presented to them, so long as they can work.
So your stance is "the user should see nothing different". . . So is mine.
-
And like with any hypervisor any cloud provider has options to migrate to them.
Migration away on the other hand is a different conversation.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
What does backing up a workload mean to you?
I backup everything so I can restore to whatever, whenever. That is my workload. Whatever gets me back to operational, hypervisor excluded.
It means he is changing the scope to suit his point of view.
-
And you didn't give XCP-ng a chance?
-
@dbeato said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
And you didn't give XCP-ng a chance?
Are you asking me? Of course not. It didn't exist 6 years ago.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
@Obsolesce 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:
@DustinB3403 said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
If Cockpit had functionality "export a backup to <insert remote>" right there I wouldn't be as I have been. Because, you need something additional.
Who else has that command?
Hyper-V Server does have WSB semi built in, it's an additional feature you need to enable. After that it's simple commands or remotely via the GUI.
But why export backup? Backups should already be off the host...
Well, the exporting is what turns a snapshot into a backup, in a sense.
Oh is that what he meant.
-
@JaredBusch said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
@dbeato said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
And you didn't give XCP-ng a chance?
Are you asking me? Of course not. It didn't exist 6 years ago.
No, I was asking to the OP, XenServer was prior to that but we all know how we felt as soon as 7.1 changes came.
-
@JaredBusch said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
@dbeato said in Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On:
And you didn't give XCP-ng a chance?
Are you asking me? Of course not. It didn't exist 6 years ago.
But you still haven't and continue to piss and moan about XS/XCP-ng and XO as "being my toy". Yet you refuse to try them, at least publicly. (which I haven't made either, besides working to make XO more accessible).
I'd really be interested in a review of XCP-ng and XO from @JaredBusch
