New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
always KVM, except you are so broke and the deal aka offer is so much cheaper and you don't care and don't need the features (custom kernel, kernel modules, install any os you like) of a KVM then go for it.
Have you looked at: https://lowendbox.com/openvz-xen-and-kvm-the-differences-the-advantages-a-comparison/
For me, the motto is KVM where you can, OpenVZ if you must.
It depends on your needs obviously. OpenVZ is generally cheap, easy, and usually fine for most simple-use cases. It may have some limitations you care about. Such as tying you to a specific kernel major release, making upgrades impossible until the provider supports it.
Personally I find KVM more flexible and predictable, but I'll use OpenVZ if there is no other choice or the provider prices KVM so high that it isn't worth it.
Brainless choice kvm
@frakass
In short, OVZ is kernel-based virtualization (OpenVZ is an OS-level virtualization solution), KVM is hardware virtualization.
Advantages of OVZ:
Disadvantages of OVZ:
Advantages of KVM:
Disadvantages of KVM:
In general, the best choice is KVM.
OVZ is suitable if you need to change resources amount of VPS very often.
My biggest beef against OpenVZ is the network interface.
Almost every provider uses venet interface that delivers LINUX_SLL packet format.
Many of my apps would need extra code logic to accommodate LINUX_SLL.
OpenVZ supports veth that has Ethernet header.
I wonder why don't providers offer veth network interface in OpenVZ?
If they do, I'm more willing to accept OpenVZ.
I always choose whatever is cheaper.
What others have written is correct. The KVM experience is closer to a physical server than the OVZ one. But for all the things I've been using KVM VPSs for, I could also do them using OVZ. The added capabilities of KVM are not needed for someone like me.
Most common reason is likely that venet is default and they have not switched. If you ask a low-end provider to switch they'll likely think “for the $1/month or less you are paying you want me to change my host config?, yeah nah.” or similar.
If a host does consider switching they'll have a quick scan of documentation, see things like https://wiki.openvz.org/Differences_between_venet_and_veth with tables that state “network security: low” and “performance: fast” (where venet is suggested to be faster than this fast), and go right back to that “yeah, nah” response.
Like privileged containers in LXC, I'm thinking veth is something you'd consider using if you control all the containers (i.e. this is a private host), but not if you have unknown users in control of containers.
my app "snapd" doesn't run on ovz.
so at least for "snapd" to run you need a kvm.