Good Morning, I need your suggestions regarding linux open source virtualization software. Which is the most stable as of today?
Are you referring to desktop or server virtualization? On desktops, I'd use VMware or VirtualBox, on servers I'd go for KVM or OpenVZ.
Thank you very much Sir Falko. Actually I already used Ubuntu Xen. Is that alright? I mean is Xen stable? I started using it last Monday. Is OpenVZ bettter than Xen?
I've been trying out alot of these virtualization solutions. Xen, Xenserver, ESX(i), VirtualBox, Proxmox and i've to say i like Proxmox the most, besides the standard things all solutions have, it has LVM snapshot backupping (no downtime), Clustering, etc, which for the other solutions means you have to buy expensive licences to get that functionality. It supports KVM and OpenVZ. So i'd give Proxmox a try
Proxmox Definitely Proxmox. We use VMWare ESX (vmotion optional) only on mission critical Windows servers. Non critical (Windows) servers that can be offline for a few minutes or so we use Proxmox with KVM. For Critical or non critical Linux servers the choice is always Proxmox. Whether you go with OpenVZ or KVM options depends on the applications run on the Linux. OpenVZ comes with memory issues. Too little configured memory can cause services to start/restart. For LAMP's I would recommend Proxmox/OpenVZ with lots of memory (over 512Mb) configured. (Especially with JAVA applications.) The memory in OpenVZ containers is shared anyway so the 'peaks' in usage only slow down the whole somewhat but does not crash or stop services on the containers. The choise of kernel with Proxmox has complicated matters somewhat recently but it's still by far the easiest/best choise in starting virtualization. I do not recommend XEN. XEN is the past. I want to believe in Ubuntu/Canonical's Eucalyptus or Enomaly or Amazon but I believe they will end in tears. (They are simply not simple enough for average admin to start using.) KVM is the future. I'm only hoping that OpenVZ will survive the coming years. If the kernel development will slow down anymore then my bet would be LXC. It looks very promising since it's already included in the normal Linux kernel. Their application level virtualisation seems VERY promising. My long time dream has been application level virtualisation. Imagine being able to migrate just the mail service from one ISPConfig to another (Have to stop drooling now.)
I agree, though proxmox does have some shortcomings. I have written about them in my topic in this board. Short summary, depending on which feature you want, you will have to chose the correct kernel. The latest one only supports KVM. Though OpenVZ is different then KVM. KVM gives gives you access nearly down to the hardware, while OpenVZ (from my limited understanding) only allows you to run in the context of the OS. But if you want something like HA with DRBD, you will need KVM as OpenVZ cannot be saved to the DRBD partition. And as you mentioned, it does use LVM and the installer will install with LVM on your drives. If you decide you need DRBD replication, you will have to set-up everything by hand again ... and I mean really EVERYTHING by hand! Don't get me wrong, I'd still take Proxmox! You just have to know all the limitations.
Proxmox finally updated OpenVZ support for 2.6.32 kernel so it's on the same level with KVM. No need to worry about the kernel versions anymore. I haven't actually tested whether the live migration on the new kernels work. There were some issues with the 2.6.24 kernels. Does anyone have any experience with OpenQRM? It seems to have LXC support. http://www.howtoforge.com/how-to-in...ntainers-in-debian-squeeze-lenny-step-by-step
