All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Hyper-V, Performance vs Convenience
Hi Guys,
We have been kicking around the idea of offering Windows & Linux VPS's utilizing Microsoft's Hyper-V as an alternative to the KVM + SolusVM platform we are currently offering with the primary goal of increasing VPS performance.
We are considering Hyper-V mainly due to the following:
-Increased I/O performance for both Linux & Windows guests (In some cases dramatic increases)
-Large gain in CPU performance for Windows guests (Mainly due to this year old KVM bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949547)
-Most rhel & debian based distros are now shipping with Hyper-v support by default
-We can offer better backups, backup retention & restoration with Vembu Storgrid
-Easy & Fast VM Migrations, whether inside the DC or across the world.
-Export the VM's and allow clients to download them should they desire.
-Custom VM's, ISO's & OS's more easily supported.
-We can easily import client VHD's & Hyper-V exports to allow easier migration & setup.
The only real downside we have found thus far is the lack of a well made & maintained control panel for Hyper-V that would allow for full automation for both Windows & Linux virtual machines as well as client management access.
Should we move forward we (Support) would need to do the deployments, OS reloads & IP management manually until we measure the success of the new platform. Should everything go well we would likely begin development work on an internal management system within 12 months with the goal of providing a similar feature set that you would see from SolusVM, Virtualizor etc.
Why on earth would we even consider doing things manually?
Right now we are straight up not happy with the performance coming out of KVM and the lead time of rather large bugs being fixed is a bit frustrating.
We already pay for the Windows licenses whether we use Hyper-V or KVM as we offer fully licensed Windows virtual machines as one of our primary VPS services.
So..what would you like us to do? Offer superior performance via Hyper-V or continue to use KVM and provide SolusVM access to manager your virtual machine?
Thanks for the feedback guys!
- Would you prefer the convenience of SolusVM or the performance of Hyper-V?27 votes
- Better Performance!29.63%
- Better Performance, but Support has to be reasonably fast!33.33%
- Poorer Performance, I want the Convenience & Management Access of SolusVM!7.41%
- I LIKE VOTING!29.63%
Comments
All you need is a newer version of KVM QMEU that's not packaged with CentOS 6. See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=889222
I have proxmox and that bug also seems to be present..
What version of qmeu are you running?
Thanks! We are already testing against it internally and while it appears to resolve the CPU to a degree, even basic tasks inside the VM's appear to be causing the host node to spike & use quite a lot of CPU.
@Everyone - Thank you very much for your feedback!
Aye. The QEMU version packaged with CentOS is positively ANCIENT. BlueVM's newer KVM nodes run Ubuntu instead (currently 13.10, but when 14.04 is officially released we'll begin preparing to update to that), which packages QEMU 1.5.0 with 13.10 and 1.7.0 with 14.04, BOTH of which SIGNIFICANTLY outperform qemu-kvm 0.12 that CentOS packages. In theory you could compile your own RPM of 1.7.0 and deploy it to the nodes, but Ubuntu and its newer kernel perform quite well.