Why I Feel KVM Is the Easiest HyperVisor to Learn the Basics On
-
All hypervisors have their pros and cons. No one is the obvious only choice. Each has a place and the market is not quickly destroying one in favour of another. Clearly in the highest end space, KVM has displaced Xen, but those two have ruled since virtualization began. No one else plays in the biggest cloud space. But when it comes to small shops whose primary need is for things to be super simple, why do I feel that KVM is often the best choice there?
- Free. Free itself doesn't make something great, but it is a big factor. Free and open systems mean there is no overhead in getting pricing, figuring out packages, being limited as to where it can be deployed. Got a system? Roll it out and use it. It allows spare equipment to be used for a backup or a lab or testing. It changes how you approach things. It has value and that value is in lowering the mental overhead of use.
- Licensing. Again, free and open. Zero time spent figuring out what license is needed, what limits it places on you, when you'd exceed it, or what you get. No time worrying about maintaining a license that might expire. In the time it takes someone to figure out VMware ESXi licensing for the first time (with loads of chances of having gotten it wrong) you could have your first KVM server up and running.
- Acquisition. No hoops to jump through. No being put on a mailing list. No special site to make credentials on. No wondering if you got the right media for your license. No worrying that it won't be available again later when you need it. Just go to Fedora, Ubuntu, Suse, CentOS, etc. and download. It's free, it's public, you can get it any time.
- Updates and Patching. No worrying about which versions or editions you have access to, no worrying that you will do something wrong and lose access to patches. Patching is super simple, easier than any other platform, and reboots are probably the least frequent, or nearly so. Again, the same mantra, it's simple and easy making it more likely for you to get right the first time. Simply "less mental overhead."
- Install. Most installs, like Fedora's, are quick and trivially easy. Way simpler than Hyper-V or even Windows. Less to know, less to answer, less to worry about. And all installed in a single go. No need to install separate "roles" after the fact. Simply choose KVM during the main install and voila.
- Integrated. Unlike all three other players, many KVM installs (like Fedora that I'm really talking about here) you don't need special third party tools, or separate paid-for add ons from your vendor to have a simple GUI for your virtualization server. Sure they all provide CLI out of the box, but almost no one wants to work with that. KVM with Cockpit is fully integrated and is all included in one system. No deploying something additional, no hidden gotchas that you have to buy. Simple, easy.
- Self contained. Some systems like Hyper-V require infrastructure like Active Directory to be easy to manage. KVM has nothing like that. It works in its simplest mode in its simplest deployment. Hyper-V is only simple is the complexities of Active Directory are in place before hand, and you have staff who are comfortable with maintaining AD. Even in the simplest shops, AD adds overhead to the system. And in many, it's a large and unnecessary cost. KVM avoids all that complexity.
- Support. All virtualization has trivial access to third party support. But primary vendor support can be difficult as vendors like Microsoft who do not offer traditional support for smaller businesses, or like VMware who require certain licensing levels in order to be allowed to purchase support. With KVM support is normally direct and simple. In all cases, it is, of course, paid.
Many people who have forgotten all of those learning curves of their favourite systems will tell you that pricing, licensing, AD, separate management consoles and other pieces are "so easy to learn". But that is simply not the whole story. The Internet (including ML) is full of threads of people asking questions about each of these aspects because they all carry a bit of complexity. Very few people, even those using product X all the time are truly clear on exactly what it costs, what its licensing limitations are, what happens if the license expires (or the product is no longer available), or don't need to do anything to have all of the needed infrastructure.
KVM may not be the easiest systems for complex deployments. But for the simplest deployments with the lowest learning curve, I don't feel that any other product comes close. In many cases, you should be able to acquire KVM media, and perform a basic (but well done) install before even being clear on pricing and licensing options for most products. Hyper-V alone can take hours for someone new to the product to even understand what it is, how to get it, and how they are allowed to use it and many people who even consult on it find it so confusing that they aren't sure how it affects other licensing!
It's really difficult to explain just how 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.
-
@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.
-
@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.
-
@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.
-
@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.
-
@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.
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.
-
Now don't get me wrong, I'm still working with Fedora 29 and cockpit to create and manage Virtual Machines.
But in order to create a complete automated system, I've needed to setup a backup system, install agents and then monitor it.
Not only that, but I'm sure there is some means of automating the monitoring portion of KVM, but I've yet to get there and figure it out. I'm sure it's not just a few clicks or even a solidified "we recommend this method" type of conversation. Being Linux is the land of options and there are so many options to pick and choose from.
-
@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.
-
@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?
-
@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?"
Of course not, the conversation is we need to virtualize and get to a better position then where we are today. What do you recommend?
You then provide an solution, be it KVM, Hyper-V or whatever else, with something that covers backing up and protecting whatever you're implementing.
-
@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?
XAPI has this option.
-
@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:
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?
XAPI has this option.
But the point is, almost no one is using the CLI in this way.
-
@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:
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?
XAPI has this option.
That's pretty handy. I've not used that with XAPI.
-
@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.
You only have to think about "how do we back up this new system" because either you are forgetting the world of traditional backups, or you are confusing the platform (virtualization) with the operating system. You have to think about backups when you deploy OSes, not when you deploy platforms.
Same with physical servers. It's not the bench guys in the datacenter saying "now, how will we back this up?" No, it's the system admins with the operating systems who ask this.
While it's nice if everyone involved anywhere remembers to think about backups, there is nothing special about deploying new virtualization to trigger this.
We are doing multiple company migrations from Hyper-V to KVM recently, not one has to consider this, as they aren't agentless before, so the rollout of KVM (or anything else) has zero bearing.
-
@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.
