Downsides/disadvantages of using newer kernel with Proxmox?

ispirto

Renowned Member
Oct 20, 2012
37
1
73
Hello,

I've searched about this a lot but could not find a good answer.

I won't ever use OpenVZ in a million years. So, is there any downside using a newer kernel with Proxmox?

I noticed that in the past there was some different kernel branches like 2.6.35 (without OpenVZ) but they got discontinued. Any reason why?

Would it be possible to create a new Proxmox branch for only KVM with latest kernels? I think this will have lots of advantages while keeping the support for OpenVZ on the current branch. I know this will double the work for developers. But it might be a good idea since there is a trend to use KVM and with this Proxmox can really make a huge difference over other alternatives.

If anyone is wondering why I'm looking to use newer kernels is because of libguestfs.

Oktay
 
Last edited:
I had a play with a test server after reading this. Installed the SID backport kernel (3.2).
Other than loosing the openVZ features it all seems to work quite well. This is clustered to an up to date 2.3 with original kernel and migration etc all still work fine. (don't have fencing set up so haven't tested HA). The test 2k8r2 server I built seemed a little faster actually (Disk IO was up a bit using ATTO).
Windows server using default settings except VirtIO disk & NIC.

3.2.jpgKernel version jpg
 
Last edited:
I had a play with a test server after reading this. Installed the SID backport kernel (3.2).
Other than loosing the openVZ features it all seems to work quite well. This is clustered to an up to date 2.3 with original kernel and migration etc all still work fine. (don't have fencing set up so haven't tested HA). The test 2k8r2 server I built seemed a little faster actually (Disk IO was up a bit using ATTO).
Windows server using default settings except VirtIO disk & NIC.

View attachment 1358Kernel version jpg

I did the same. Installed 3.2 SID kernel, but couldn't test it through-fully, yet.

- - - Updated - - -

The pve kernel is well tested (we only test with that kernel).

Can you please share your testing methods with us so we can test other kernels with multiple people on multiple systems and report how stable they are?
 
I had a play with a test server after reading this. Installed the SID backport kernel (3.2).
Other than loosing the openVZ features it all seems to work quite well. This is clustered to an up to date 2.3 with original kernel and migration etc all still work fine. (don't have fencing set up so haven't tested HA). The test 2k8r2 server I built seemed a little faster actually (Disk IO was up a bit using ATTO).
Windows server using default settings except VirtIO disk & NIC.

View attachment 1358Kernel version jpg

Hey I tried it also....but think about this...the pve-kernel has 1000Hz
 

About

The Proxmox community has been around for many years and offers help and support for Proxmox VE, Proxmox Backup Server, and Proxmox Mail Gateway.
We think our community is one of the best thanks to people like you!

Get your subscription!

The Proxmox team works very hard to make sure you are running the best software and getting stable updates and security enhancements, as well as quick enterprise support. Tens of thousands of happy customers have a Proxmox subscription. Get yours easily in our online shop.

Buy now!