Arguments for using Proxmox on enterprise

[PelleH]

Hi,
we have been using Proxmox VE for all our virtualization for many years. Now, however, my boss has decided to listen to our IT operations partner, who believes that Hyper-V is much better, probably because they know it better. The discussion started because we had problems with our storage (congested FreeNAS servers?). Work to move storage to Proxmox Ceph has already started.

What I want are some arguments for keeping Proxmox. We have had a few minor problems during all the years with Proxmox (most of which were due to incorrect configuration).
The question concerns operation in enterprise and we have support agreements on the servers with Proxmox so it is not an argument that it is free, but the costs will be roughly the same with Hyper-V and Proxmox. However, the cost of supporting Hyper-V will be hidden in other operating costs.

The boss also has the idea, encouraged by our IT operations partner, to throw out all our hardware consisting of relatively new Supermicro servers, and buy HPE or Dell. It is also quite a lot of storage so the cost goes up.

/Pelle H

 

[Karsten]

Hi.

For me, the strongest argument is, that it is a Linux system. We know how to operate Linux, we can fix things that go wrong and are experienced.

Furthermore, our whole toolchain "around" the servers is specialised on handling Linux - backup strategy and tools, monitoring tools, metric tools, configuration toolchain (Git, Ansible), local management scripts... if you change to Windows, you will need a whole bunch of new, proprietary tools to get the VM hosts managed, backuped, secured (Anti-Virus). And you need to get a lot of new knowledge to get your job of providing a stable and reliable platform done.

We are no Windows professionals and will never be some. Never change a running system... :-D

Best
Karsten

 

[Pierre-Yves]

The match between VMware / HyperV / Proxmox is still very active. I recently made a public talk on that.
My purpose was not to tell Proxmox is better because its opensource ... It's better because it can do often more, sometimes equal, rarely less.

Here's my arguments :
- Proxmox born in 2008, it is mature, stable and Opensource (ie new release are lauched when they are ready for prod, not ready to sell)
- Proxmox is Linux based (72,9% of the Webservers according to w3techs.com are Linux based), probably the most stable OS in Linux world
- Proxmox supports both VMs and containers (so less expensive according to CPU/RAM vs number of VM)
- Proxmox got pro support subscription with unlimited tickets, 2 hours response time (for a very reasonnable price imo) and possible SSH remote support
- Proxmox got all functionnalities of the others but without paying for options : live migrations, etc ...
- Proxmox can do High Availability without specific hardwares and "out of the box", no need of external fencing hardwares
- Proxmox is technical standard compliants : you can mix hardwares as soon as they use non proprietary protocols/specs
- No "hidden costs" when you want to extand your cluster (new licences costs, etc ...) or functionnalities
- Firewall capabilities are natively included (easy to configure, no need of an extra firewall)
- With Proxmox Backup Server, you've got the same as VWMare/Veeam or Hyper-v/Veeam

I used to talk with that kind of IT partners that only wants to sell licences and support contracts for VMware/HyperV because it's easy, bankable and technical resources are present in their crew.
You can go on the GDPR way too ...

Hope this will help

Regards

 

[PelleH]

Thank you both, I agree with you. However, it is difficult to use open source as an argument to someone who believes that Microsoft is the standard that everyone should use.
We also use Proxmox Backup server and it is even better than expected to be version 1.0. We also using Veeam but onlu using it for granular restore for Exchange and files.

One argument that can actually be rewarding is the GDPR - what do you mean by that #Pierre-Yves?

 

[Pierre-Yves]

With Opensource solutions, you know what is done.
With proprietary software, you don't know what runs inside de box ...
So you are not sure some data dont go away without you authorization

 

[PelleH]

Good point. I work for the government so this can be a good point.

 

[apoc]

Hyper-V is a complex thing after all. I don't have experience with PVE clusters and what I read along, they are not simple.
But Hyper-V is not simple as well.
Just using Hyper-V is usually not really helping btw. To gain benefits you need to consider using System Center - which drives costs up again.

Supermicro is a decent server-brand. It is not HPE, it is no Dell, but it is good, solid hardware. From functionalities we are talking about x86 technology. There is not much difference.
But there are reasons why Supermicro is supplier for a lot of datacenters, large scale datacenters. And even other companies have chosen Supermicro as plattform for their own servers.

What is different on Supermicro gear: Support levels, hardware exchange SLAs etc.
But guess what? 24/7 support wont solve your operatioin problem. You need a reliable infrastructure on the software-level anyways. Then you can use any hardware below. Even Next Business day parts replacement is not an issue then.

If they want to purchase HPe or Dell - fine. But putting Hyper-V on top of it is not providing significant benefits. We see a lot of people currently trying to get out of the Hyper-V space, because they "experienced" the management the last 3-5 years - guess what? They didn't like it