Question about AWS



  • @vhinzsanchez said in Question about AWS:

    VMWare, it changed the landscape because of pricing.

    Why? If there is one option that is not likely to make sense, that's it. Not that VMware is bad, but it is completely wrong for this use case. To the point that it should never even be considered, let alone considered strongly.

    KVM, Xen, and Hyper-V are all fine options. I would lean to KVM, it makes more sense for you. More "future looking".

    VMware makes zero sense.... it doesn't have the features, the cost, or the "future" that a business person would want. Again, this sounds like a totally bad emotional reaction. Ask him for his "business reasons"... how would VMware help to make money?



  • @vhinzsanchez said in Question about AWS:

    I was loving XenServer until I tried Proxmox

    We generally avoid ProxMox because the vendor isn't very good. It is just extra features bolted onto KVM and LXC. A pretty weird idea. It mostly works, and lots of people like it. But I would never trust that vendor in my business. They have a bad track record from 🌶



  • @vhinzsanchez said in Question about AWS:

    Though I haven't tried XCP-ng

    XCP-NG is good, that would be the only logical way to approach Xen in this scenario.



  • @scottalanmiller said in Question about AWS:

    @vhinzsanchez said in Question about AWS:

    VMWare, it changed the landscape because of pricing.

    Why? If there is one option that is not likely to make sense, that's it. Not that VMware is bad, but it is completely wrong for this use case. To the point that it should never even be considered, let alone considered strongly.

    KVM, Xen, and Hyper-V are all fine options. I would lean to KVM, it makes more sense for you. More "future looking".

    VMware makes zero sense.... it doesn't have the features, the cost, or the "future" that a business person would want. Again, this sounds like a totally bad emotional reaction. Ask him for his "business reasons"... how would VMware help to make money?

    and it made the project to a crawl.



  • @vhinzsanchez said in Question about AWS:

    @scottalanmiller said in Question about AWS:

    @vhinzsanchez said in Question about AWS:

    VMWare, it changed the landscape because of pricing.

    Why? If there is one option that is not likely to make sense, that's it. Not that VMware is bad, but it is completely wrong for this use case. To the point that it should never even be considered, let alone considered strongly.

    KVM, Xen, and Hyper-V are all fine options. I would lean to KVM, it makes more sense for you. More "future looking".

    VMware makes zero sense.... it doesn't have the features, the cost, or the "future" that a business person would want. Again, this sounds like a totally bad emotional reaction. Ask him for his "business reasons"... how would VMware help to make money?

    and it made the project to a crawl.

    Ha. We always find the biggest problems with it are around license management. It takes so much unnecessary work when you are just trying to do basic tasks. And the simplest things like adding another server to the company can totally break all of the plans.



  • @scottalanmiller said in Question about AWS:

    @vhinzsanchez said in Question about AWS:

    I was loving XenServer until I tried Proxmox

    We generally avoid ProxMox because the vendor isn't very good. It is just extra features bolted onto KVM and LXC. A pretty weird idea. It mostly works, and lots of people like it. But I would never trust that vendor in my business. They have a bad track record from 🌶

    I'll have to check on that forum. I'll be checking XCP-ng and KVM this time around.



  • @vhinzsanchez said in Question about AWS:

    @scottalanmiller said in Question about AWS:

    @vhinzsanchez said in Question about AWS:

    I was loving XenServer until I tried Proxmox

    We generally avoid ProxMox because the vendor isn't very good. It is just extra features bolted onto KVM and LXC. A pretty weird idea. It mostly works, and lots of people like it. But I would never trust that vendor in my business. They have a bad track record from 🌶

    I'll have to check on that forum. I'll be checking XCP-ng and KVM this time around.

    No need to check, every time someone talks about them they have hired trolls who pop on to promote the product. 🌶 is filled with fake reviews by people who created one time accounts to spam reviews of ProxMox. They got caught over and over again, but just kept doing it. You can't trust anything good you've ever heard about it, because they generate fake reviews everywhere, and if you mention it, their staff will create accounts and attack you.



  • @scottalanmiller said in Question about AWS:

    @vhinzsanchez said in Question about AWS:

    @scottalanmiller said in Question about AWS:

    @vhinzsanchez said in Question about AWS:

    VMWare, it changed the landscape because of pricing.

    Why? If there is one option that is not likely to make sense, that's it. Not that VMware is bad, but it is completely wrong for this use case. To the point that it should never even be considered, let alone considered strongly.

    KVM, Xen, and Hyper-V are all fine options. I would lean to KVM, it makes more sense for you. More "future looking".

    VMware makes zero sense.... it doesn't have the features, the cost, or the "future" that a business person would want. Again, this sounds like a totally bad emotional reaction. Ask him for his "business reasons"... how would VMware help to make money?

    and it made the project to a crawl.

    Ha. We always find the biggest problems with it are around license management. It takes so much unnecessary work when you are just trying to do basic tasks. And the simplest things like adding another server to the company can totally break all of the plans.

    I second this. I was just trying to get a basic VM with ability to transfer VMs to another server should there be something wrong in the host...HCI was proposed.

    It was good, so is the pricetag.



  • @vhinzsanchez said in Question about AWS:

    I'll be checking XCP-ng and KVM this time around.

    Those are likely the best choices. KVM is really what makes the most sense now. It is what everyone is using, it is where all of the focus is. I was the strongest proponent of Xen for a really long time, and I still love it. But KVM is just the more sensible option. So much easier to get support and tools.

    Get Fedora, install KVM, use Cockpit, oVirt or any number of options. Easy peasy.



  • @vhinzsanchez said in Question about AWS:

    @scottalanmiller said in Question about AWS:

    @vhinzsanchez said in Question about AWS:

    @scottalanmiller said in Question about AWS:

    @vhinzsanchez said in Question about AWS:

    VMWare, it changed the landscape because of pricing.

    Why? If there is one option that is not likely to make sense, that's it. Not that VMware is bad, but it is completely wrong for this use case. To the point that it should never even be considered, let alone considered strongly.

    KVM, Xen, and Hyper-V are all fine options. I would lean to KVM, it makes more sense for you. More "future looking".

    VMware makes zero sense.... it doesn't have the features, the cost, or the "future" that a business person would want. Again, this sounds like a totally bad emotional reaction. Ask him for his "business reasons"... how would VMware help to make money?

    and it made the project to a crawl.

    Ha. We always find the biggest problems with it are around license management. It takes so much unnecessary work when you are just trying to do basic tasks. And the simplest things like adding another server to the company can totally break all of the plans.

    I second this. I was just trying to get a basic VM with ability to transfer VMs to another server should there be something wrong in the host...HCI was proposed.

    It was good, so is the pricetag.

    HCI is not for transferring. Who proposed that?

    HC on Vmware is absurdly expensive. But it is free on KVM, Xen, and Hyper-V.



  • @scottalanmiller said in Question about AWS:

    @vhinzsanchez said in Question about AWS:

    I'll be checking XCP-ng and KVM this time around.

    Those are likely the best choices. KVM is really what makes the most sense now. It is what everyone is using, it is where all of the focus is. I was the strongest proponent of Xen for a really long time, and I still love it. But KVM is just the more sensible option. So much easier to get support and tools.

    Get Fedora, install KVM, use Cockpit, oVirt or any number of options. Easy peasy.

    Thanks, I'll do that.



  • I like Cockpit a lot for that, BUT it lacks the ability to create the initial VMs. So we do that through the command line. But you can connect to the VMs, view their stats, go to their consoles and such in Cockpit. And that is what we like.

    Fedora 30 is not far away and I am hopeful that they have improved Cockpit for that significantly.



  • @scottalanmiller said in Question about AWS:

    HCI is not for transferring. Who proposed that?

    HC on Vmware is absurdly expensive. But it is free on KVM, Xen, and Hyper-V.

    Guess who? Vendor? VMWare-accredited? 😆



  • oVirt is the more robust, enterprise option for now. Also free. But gets installed as a VM on top of the KVM hosts. oVirt is almost certainly better for a cluster. For single hosts, I'd use command line tools and Cockpit.



  • @vhinzsanchez said in Question about AWS:

    @scottalanmiller said in Question about AWS:

    HCI is not for transferring. Who proposed that?

    HC on Vmware is absurdly expensive. But it is free on KVM, Xen, and Hyper-V.

    Guess who? Vendor? VMWare-accredited? 😆

    I assume a reseller, not VMware themselves.



  • Time to get those predatory vendors out of there!



  • @scottalanmiller said in Question about AWS:

    I assume a reseller, not VMware themselves.

    correct, a local reseller



  • @vhinzsanchez said in Question about AWS:

    @scottalanmiller said in Question about AWS:

    I assume a reseller, not VMware themselves.

    correct, a local reseller

    This is where the fundamental problems start. Why would a reseller be allowed to propose bad ideas and encourages to trick you guys into getting screwed? Somewhere in management, someone is messing up the basics of business. If you have a predatory vendor who is just out to ruin your project, why is someone listening to them? Just kick them out the door and call the police if they come back. It sounds like that vendor is your enemy, why is the boss not protecting the company from them?



  • Everyone needs a vendor sometimes, but there are good vendors and predatory ones. A good vendor listens to your needs and does what IT directs them to do, sometimes adding a little advice. Predatory vendors try to make their money by hurting your business and aren't there to serve IT, but to undermine it.



  • @scottalanmiller said in Question about AWS:

    Time to get those predatory vendors out of there!

    You know what I don't like? Making this myself. Don't have enough confidence for production stuff. In test environment, I can surely study but when in production, I do not think I can do it. Sad truth to it.

    The best thing here is that the legacy systems will still be here...untouched.



  • @vhinzsanchez said in Question about AWS:

    @scottalanmiller said in Question about AWS:

    Time to get those predatory vendors out of there!

    You know what I don't like? Making this myself. Don't have enough confidence for production stuff. In test environment, I can surely study but when in production, I do not think I can do it. Sad truth to it.

    The best thing here is that the legacy systems will still be here...untouched.

    No one wants to be stuck on their own doing that stuff. But vendors don't help with that. To solve that problem, you need a consultant / outsourcer. There is a whole world of IT companies that do that one specific thing for exactly this case!



  • You should have an IT partner, like an MSP or an ITSP, that is there to support you. That is there to help the business and is on the "same team" as you. Resellers are the enemy, they are the other side of the fence. It is the job of IT to defend the business against resellers.





  • One thing that I did not see @scottalanmiller mention is that colocation.

    Your gear, still virtualized how you want, but not in your office.

    What kind of colocatoin costs are there in the Phillipines?

    in the US, it is really a no brainer to go with a solid higher tier colo like Colocation America simply because of the economics of scale. That level of service is rock solid and affordable.

    But at the lower end, good reputable places with customer cages are not bad choices if the price is right and their backend services are good.



  • @vhinzsanchez
    Don't forget colocation as an option too. Usually a colocation datacenter has better internet connection, better power, better cooling and is physically more secure.

    Ahh, @JaredBusch beat me to it I see.



  • I agree, colocation is a very real consideration.



  • Colo solves the cost of storage, but dealing with 6TB with their bad internet will still be terrible.

    @scottalanmiller said in Question about AWS:

    Even in the US with fast fiber, accessing 6TB over the Internet with SMB is ridiculously slow. Having to do it over DSL from another country.... impossible.



  • @bnrstnr said in Question about AWS:

    Colo solves the cost of storage, but dealing with 6TB with their bad internet will still be terrible.

    @scottalanmiller said in Question about AWS:

    Even in the US with fast fiber, accessing 6TB over the Internet with SMB is ridiculously slow.  Having to do it over DSL from another country.... impossible.
    

    Having 6TB does not mean you are accessing all 6TB all of the time.



  • @vhinzsanchez What does your 6TB consist of? Are users working with large folders of CAD drawings or something?



  • @JaredBusch said in Question about AWS:

    @bnrstnr said in Question about AWS:

    Colo solves the cost of storage, but dealing with 6TB with their bad internet will still be terrible.

    @scottalanmiller said in Question about AWS:

    Even in the US with fast fiber, accessing 6TB over the Internet with SMB is ridiculously slow.  Having to do it over DSL from another country.... impossible.
    

    Having 6TB does not mean you are accessing all 6TB all of the time.

    No, but even accessing it sometimes will be problematic.