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.
Why do people like KVM better than OpenVZ?
I see a lot of people like KVM much more than OpenVZ. Some of them, actually, seem to think that OVZ is BS!
I found out that some providers offer an excellent OVZ boxes with great stability and very good performance, when some KVM boxes are disappointing (terrible disk ios and cpu).
Ok, some resources as RAM are more dedicated with KVM and theoretically there is no overselling, but in real life, is this true? Also, OVZ can handle better the resources, so, you need less ram.
Don't you think that at the end, all depends on the provider?
Comments
no, its a combination of both, provider & virtualization type
if i install my stuff on a vps then i want everything to work.. with kvm and xen i never had issues running anything with openvz it was the opposite of that (example: PPP module for the pptpd server software)
another thing that keeps bugging me is that providers still provide openvz while theres better virtualization software that supports more, its just cheap to stick with openvz as provider.
OpenVZ is probably the easiest virtualization software to manage as a system administrator, especially with SolusVM. This is the route most providers go. OpenVZ VPS Servers can be good depending on the hardware and the provider as for providing support.
OpenVZ is awlays means oversale?
OpenVZ gets a bad rep for overselling, even though people really shouldn't be buying from a provider that they don't trust to take care of them. I prefer OpenVZ. It's basically bare metal performance.
Also, OVZ can handle better the resources, so, you need less ram.
Huh? Are you refering to the shared kernel?
Like mark_r says I want everything to work in 15 mins. I just have to write the same script to automate everything.On ovz I can struggle for hours and even days.
1) Some kernel modules are not running on openvz due to shared kernel and bugs. (a)
2) You have to enable manually some modules on openvz.You have to open a ticket if they do not work.After restart of host node enabled modules may not work and ticketing again.
3) Sysctl optimizations are not running on openvz.
4) Only openvz providers mostly have low linux skills. (a)
a) http://lowendtalk.com/discussion/10247/enabling-xt-string-module-on-openvz-containers
Incorrect. SolusVM will install KVM and Xen too. You can't pinpoint a provider's skill by virtualization type. OpenVZ is easiest to oversell, that's it. In many aspects, it's far more difficult to administrate than KVM.
@jarland This is my experience with only openvz providers with a referenced topic showing low linux skills of the providers.
I trust more if the provider offers both kvm/xen and openvz and choose kvm/xen where available.
Often, but now always. "Overselling" is fine, if done right. Xen/KVM can be oversold as well.
Some people still think the moon landings were faked. Just smile, nod, and walk away
You can also run Windows on KVM.
Actually this is not anyone opinion, this is a fact!
kcryptd
For me: Security. Encryption works on KVM's. I can guarantee that my FUSE mounts and system wide encryption is safe from the provider (and the government?). Encryption is next to useless on OpenVZ containers.
I have very limited knowledge in Linux - having only been running servers for a year or so, I am still learning. However one of the things I do know is that OpenVZ network adapters are referred to as 'venet' by default which can upset some scripts and software that rely on and assume the use of 'eth' which I know KVM uses.
My understanding is that KVM is closer to being a dedicated server as it uses it's own kernel independent of the host node (someone please correct me if I'm wrong) and from an end user point of view you have more control.
All OpenVZ providers oversell, some a little but most of them 4 to 8x the real capacity of node.With KVM or XEN HVM its not easy to oversell even when you do client can easily know in most of the cases running a few commands.
Most of the newbie hosts start with OpenVZ because you need no technical knowledge to run it with the help of Solusvm & can oversell beyond imagination.
OpenVZ is easier to oversell and mostly oversold.
A KVM/XEN provider mostly provide OpenVZ too. (Maybe they begin with OpenVZ then grow to KVM/XEN.
Xen, KVM & VMWare is full virtualization(or close to dedicated server as you put it), OpenVZ is just a container.
Refer to @jarland above
Yes, but I think all depends on the server and the provider's capability to handre and not oversell too much.
@mpkossen .......
companies that do not switch to newer and improved software to provide their services are either lazy or just wanna reduce their costs, not upgrading their hardware to make running a better virtualization possible.. they just dont care about the user experience, they will keep justifying their OpenVZ usage.
I really dont expect positive/valid answers on this post that could truely proof a point
showing what advantage OVZ got for the customers experience compared to xen or kvm.
Everything works in kvm
Never insterested to buy OpenVZ vps anymore even though from LEB top Q3 provider ;-)
>
>
So you're saying that every provider who doesn't charge enough to hit a reasonable ROI and make a steady profit that is high enough to justify replacing hardware every year and forcing customers to test the latest fads doesn't care about their clients? No. If you don't understand how to do it, that's fine, don't piss on those who do. You really want a provider who cares so much about the user experience that they'll swap "virtualization" technologies every time someone on the internet gets the idea that this one over here is somehow fancier?
What answers and proof do you want? Hardware virtualization lowers performance results. When translating through hardware emulation you lose performance over bare metal, which is what you get from OpenVZ as it actually runs as a container with pure access to the hardware. I don't need proof for that, that's the fact of how it works.
Also, what is newer and improved? KVM? How? Both are current projects with recent updates.
i'm always suffering from unstable pptpd on OVZ, and never encounter a problem with kvm or xen.
i don't know if it is ovz's fault, have you guys have such problem？
@jarland don't ever bother, read his comments
You really have no idea. You continue to spout FUD about OpenVZ.
If price and performance have nothing to do with the user experience then you're right, hosts just don't care about it.
Hehe, I know, I know ;-) Did you get the PM I sent you about this?
Don't try to put my words in the wrong direction, you can read what i was saying, dont try to correct me in "your way"
what i can make out of your post is that the only advantage you point out is "speed"
i think that mainly depends on the host node, how fast it will go, that would proof my previous post right.
so far i see no reason to ever pick a OVZ vps it still does not support alot of things that XEN and KVM DO support.
I stick with my previous post.