Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links


Categories

In this Discussion

› › Virtualizor and Host OS
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.

Virtualizor and Host OS

UmairUmair Member
in General

Hello,

While I am still experimenting with ProxMox and Debian, I need to work on a new project and need to setup a new Node ASAP. Since I am already using Virtualizor and so far, happy with easy of use, I am going to setup the node with Virtualizor. (I need more time for my grip of Debian/Proxmox)

Here is my question.

Which OS you would choose for the Host Node?

I was thinking to use AlmaLinux 9.x but Virtualizor doesn't support it yet.
Should I stick with CentOS 7 for more stability (which is what I am currently using mostly) ??
Is there any performance/features benefit for going with Almalinux 8.x ??

I understand CentOS 7 EOL is around the corner. But so far, it has been a stable OS and works without any issue. (also I am more used to it with most of my setups).

Any suggestions / recommendations ?

Comments

  • tentortentor Member, Patron Provider

    Should I stick with CentOS 7 for more stability (which is what I am currently using mostly) ??

    No

    Is there any performance/features benefit for going with Almalinux 8.x ??

    Yes - newer kernels are better in terms of optimisations and performance

    Thanked by 1Umair
  • crunchbitscrunchbits Member, Patron Provider, Top Host

    Generally partial to Alma and Debian (depending on what we're doing--one of those two always fits the bill).

    Would recommend going with newest (stable) you can, though there is something to be said for working on what you're already comfortable with.

    Will also depend on your hardware, but particularly with Ryzens (and expecially 7000 series stuff) the newer kernels are a must or you're leaving a ton of performance on the table.

    Thanked by 2Umair Patriarch
  • UmairUmair Member

    @tentor said:
    Yes - newer kernels are better in terms of optimisations and performance

    Fair point.

    @crunchbits said:

    >

    Will also depend on your hardware, but particularly with Ryzens (and expecially 7000 series stuff) the newer kernels are a must or you're leaving a ton of performance on the table.

    I didn't think of that. Thanks for pointing that out. New Server is going to be based on AMD Epyc so yea, that makes sense.

    When I was talking about being comfortable, I actually meant any CentOS/AlmaLinux/RHEL.

    I have used Ubuntu here and there but not a lot. That's why Debian+Proxmox is going to take a while to get more used to and for production use (for Me).

  • AytchAytch Member

    Latest version of Debian generally has a more up to date kernel, and would probably better for stability. If you don't want to go down that route then the latest version of AlmaLinux would be fine.

    Thanked by 1Umair
  • JustHostJustHost Member, Patron Provider

    We use Alma on our nodes, I would advise against Ubuntu as there are a few small niggling issues that do not have a impact on performance but should they arise just waste time in resolving which maybe would be better spent serving customers or promoting your business

    Thanked by 1Umair
  • ZreindZreind Member

    You can install proxmox and both virtualizoe on the same machine. If your host node doesn’t have minimal resources like 16 gb ram, then you can install proxmox, then virtualizor and use them both.

    Thanked by 1Umair
  • UmairUmair Member

    @Zreind said:
    You can install proxmox and both virtualizoe on the same machine. If your host node doesn’t have minimal resources like 16 gb ram, then you can install proxmox, then virtualizor and use them both.

    That is an interesting thought. I have never thought about it.
    Is there any benefit for such setup ??
    Wouldn't it make more complex ? And possibility of more issues ?
    Virtualizor and Proxmox fighting with each other over bridge network ...
    I only use KVM.

  • ZreindZreind Member
    edited June 2023

    @Umair said:

    @Zreind said:
    You can install proxmox and both virtualizoe on the same machine. If your host node doesn’t have minimal resources like 16 gb ram, then you can install proxmox, then virtualizor and use them both.

    That is an interesting thought. I have never thought about it.
    Is there any benefit for such setup ??
    Wouldn't it make more complex ? And possibility of more issues ?
    Virtualizor and Proxmox fighting with each other over bridge network ...
    I only use KVM.

    No, they don't. I personally tried it and I didn't encounter any problems except general login issue to virtualizor panel (ubuntu 22.04 have too) you can easily fix it with their guide.
    Yeah, it may sound more complicated but you have proxmox advantage over only KVM setup. You can manage the VM's with proxmox too. Can be considered if a lot of fine tuning is required.
    https://www.virtualizor.com/docs/install/install-proxmox/

  • PatriarchPatriarch Member

    Since you guys are in discussions about Virtualizor,
    I have questions about it like;
    Cores percentage

    If I assign 2 cores, do I have to do 100% or 200%?
    Or even just put 0 since it means no restriction?

  • PatriarchPatriarch Member

    @crunchbits said:
    Generally partial to Alma and Debian (depending on what we're doing--one of those two always fits the bill).

    Would recommend going with newest (stable) you can, though there is something to be said for working on what you're already comfortable with.

    Will also depend on your hardware, but particularly with Ryzens (and expecially 7000 series stuff) the newer kernels are a must or you're leaving a ton of performance on the table.

    Thank you for the insights!
    So what's OS that you reference for going with Ryzen 9 series?

  • PatriarchPatriarch Member

    @Patriarch said:
    Since you guys are in discussions about Virtualizor,
    I have questions about it like;
    Cores percentage

    If I assign 2 cores, do I have to do 100% or 200%?
    Or even just put 0 since it means no restriction?

    Is there anyone can help about this? :disappointed:

  • AytchAytch Member

    @Patriarch said: If I assign 2 cores, do I have to do 100% or 200%?
    Or even just put 0 since it means no restriction?

    In the CPU Cores section you just enter the number of cores, for example 5. In the CPU % section you would enter 500% to give full access to all 5 cores.

    They have a more detailed guide here: https://www.virtualizor.com/docs/admin/creating-a-vps/#cpu-parameters

    Thanked by 1Patriarch
  • PatriarchPatriarch Member

    @Aytch said:

    @Patriarch said: If I assign 2 cores, do I have to do 100% or 200%?
    Or even just put 0 since it means no restriction?

    In the CPU Cores section you just enter the number of cores, for example 5. In the CPU % section you would enter 500% to give full access to all 5 cores.

    They have a more detailed guide here: https://www.virtualizor.com/docs/admin/creating-a-vps/#cpu-parameters

    Thank you for your respond.
    I have another question if you don't mind.

    If I assign 2 dedicated cores in CPU Affinity to a VM then I give 4 in the CPU Cores , how many percentage that I have to put in CPU % ?

    Is it 200% (following the CPU Affinity) or 400% (following the CPU Cores) ?

  • PatriarchPatriarch Member
    edited July 2023

    Btw @crunchbits according your 2 cents about

    the newer kernels are a must or you're leaving a ton of performance on the table.

    Does the performance will also different based on virtualization panel?
    Like VM managed by virtualizor, VF, or Solus VM will give different yabs/benchmark results even with a same node specs.

  • UmairUmair Member

    @Patriarch said:
    Btw @crunchbits according your 2 cents about

    the newer kernels are a must or you're leaving a ton of performance on the table.

    Does the performance will also different based on virtualization panel?
    Like VM managed by virtualizor, VF, or Solus VM will give different yabs/benchmark results even with a same node specs.

    I don't think changing of a control panel would make a difference for VM performance.
    But the configuration might make things different. Especially the way you are using disk. (like LVM/Thin LVM / Raw or Qcow2)

    VF defaults to using disk based images
    You can use same with virtualizor as well but I have it setup using LVM and RAW

    Long time when I was setting my 1st node, I did my testing and RAW was much better performance vs Qcow2. Things may have changed in recent time.

    But I will let experts answer your queries.

    Thanked by 1Patriarch
  • crunchbitscrunchbits Member, Patron Provider, Top Host

    @Umair said:

    @Patriarch said:
    Btw @crunchbits according your 2 cents about

    the newer kernels are a must or you're leaving a ton of performance on the table.

    Does the performance will also different based on virtualization panel?
    Like VM managed by virtualizor, VF, or Solus VM will give different yabs/benchmark results even with a same node specs.

    I don't think changing of a control panel would make a difference for VM performance.
    But the configuration might make things different. Especially the way you are using disk. (like LVM/Thin LVM / Raw or Qcow2)

    VF defaults to using disk based images
    You can use same with virtualizor as well but I have it setup using LVM and RAW

    Long time when I was setting my 1st node, I did my testing and RAW was much better performance vs Qcow2. Things may have changed in recent time.

    But I will let experts answer your queries.

    Outside of specific settings and configuration, it shouldn’t matter. Assuming you’re comparing KVM to KVM or similar.

    @Umair is also right about disk settings. RAW usually gave us best performance, but has other trade-offs which can definitely matter. For example: selling someone 300GB of disk but they’re only using 3GB and you need to migrate them? Qcow2 means you move 3GB, RAW means you’re moving 300GB of empty space. Just comes down to what you value—and qcow2 performance hit on nvme really wasn’t too noticeable (more so on some ssd and HDD setups).

    Thanked by 2Patriarch Umair
  • croweb_hostcroweb_host Member

    @Patriarch said:

    @Aytch said:

    @Patriarch said: If I assign 2 cores, do I have to do 100% or 200%?
    Or even just put 0 since it means no restriction?

    In the CPU Cores section you just enter the number of cores, for example 5. In the CPU % section you would enter 500% to give full access to all 5 cores.

    They have a more detailed guide here: https://www.virtualizor.com/docs/admin/creating-a-vps/#cpu-parameters

    Thank you for your respond.
    I have another question if you don't mind.

    If I assign 2 dedicated cores in CPU Affinity to a VM then I give 4 in the CPU Cores , how many percentage that I have to put in CPU % ?

    Is it 200% (following the CPU Affinity) or 400% (following the CPU Cores) ?

    I think you are wrong.
    C/P from an official Virtualizor's tutorial:

    Example 1 : If you've VPS with 4 cores and you want it to utilize only 2 cores on the host server , then you can set the CPU% value as 50.
2 ÷ 4 x 100 = 50 (CPU%)
Example 2 : If you've a VPS with 4 cores and you want it to utilize only 1 core on the host server , you can set the CPU% as 25.
1 ÷ 4 x 100 = 25 (CPU%)

    Regards,

  • PatriarchPatriarch Member

    @croweb_host said:

    @Patriarch said:

    @Aytch said:

    @Patriarch said: If I assign 2 cores, do I have to do 100% or 200%?
    Or even just put 0 since it means no restriction?

    In the CPU Cores section you just enter the number of cores, for example 5. In the CPU % section you would enter 500% to give full access to all 5 cores.

    They have a more detailed guide here: https://www.virtualizor.com/docs/admin/creating-a-vps/#cpu-parameters

    Thank you for your respond.
    I have another question if you don't mind.

    If I assign 2 dedicated cores in CPU Affinity to a VM then I give 4 in the CPU Cores , how many percentage that I have to put in CPU % ?

    Is it 200% (following the CPU Affinity) or 400% (following the CPU Cores) ?

    I think you are wrong.
    C/P from an official Virtualizor's tutorial:

    Example 1 : If you've VPS with 4 cores and you want it to utilize only 2 cores on the host server , then you can set the CPU% value as 50.
2 ÷ 4 x 100 = 50 (CPU%)
Example 2 : If you've a VPS with 4 cores and you want it to utilize only 1 core on the host server , you can set the CPU% as 25.
1 ÷ 4 x 100 = 25 (CPU%)

    Regards,

    Can you elaborate @Aytch ?

Sign In or Register to comment.