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
I was expecting worse.
Wait till they start selling vps from those
DixHost 2: Virtualization Boogaloo
Lol. Wasn't someone here used to sell vps off vps.net xen?
that's just asking for trouble haha.
everyone needs to learn, maybe try to not to mock him to much
That is not the point, the point is that he might end up having (paying) clients and he uses them like labrats within his own learning process :')
well it make sense. now thanks
He didn't say what his original virtualization setup is. I know people like to throw their arms in the air like they've been insulted at the idea of vps within a vps, but the potential of such a scenario done right can actually offer some benefits. It does increase resource requirements ever so slightly, but the loss from a decent bare-metal hypervisor like vmware is nothing to cry about, and the immediate benefit that I see is less chance of losing control of the host node in the event of failure of something as screwy as OpenVZ.
In the end what matters is that the end user receive adequate performance, not that their preferred environment that is two steps above their access level is in place. I'm not saying I plan on doing this, but I wouldn't judge anyone for wrapping a whole system in a bare metal virtualization and then installing Proxmox or something like that. I've done it in tests over the last year, when configured right there is no performance loss. The reason I decided against it in the end was that I'm not fully satisfied with ESXi, but mostly for reasons related to preferred functionality. Judge away, but there's no good reason to just make up useless rules for the game. That's how you discourage innovation.
Now a single SATA drive, there's something to judge.
If The Hostrail Man sees this, I'm not sure if that's any good..
ahaha
@jarland If you have a powerful node and that first level virtualization is only serving one vps, sounds good. This is what "smart servers" are. Specially for those situation when you have no physical or remote (kvm) access.
But, if some one is renting burstnet Xen and selling ovz vps on top of that, boy we are waiting for a disaster to strike.
It's about how you learn though and clearly this isn't the way to go :P
In his defense, he didn't say what his overhead virtualization was, where he got the system, or anything like that. It stands to reason that if a whole server virtualized can run nested virtualization with adequate or above performance, splitting the system in half with the overhead virtualization wouldn't have a huge effect. He didn't list CPU or how many vps he wanted nested. If the bottom layer vps performs as desired, little else matters.
Ideal? Probably not. A game breaker? Depends on how many vps were intended and how powerful the CPU is. Disk will be trash either way.
@jarland this is nothing new. Iweb has been doing this for a long time (smart servers), I have done this in the past to save licensing cost (litespeed, cpanel and such).But that was 1 giant vps.
But tbh, vps inside vps is going to bring performance down to brick unless the node itself is using hardcore hard drives.
Exactly. No where was it stated he wanted to sell VPSs. It could be a personal project or a testbed. Criticizing him with nothing to base it on is just foolish.