Proxmox v4 OpenVZ Alternative

[starnetwork]

Hi,
it's relevant to consider virtuozzo v7 Open source as OpenVZ Replacement for Proxmox v4.x?

It's okay to have a discussion about it? too early?

 

[wolfgang]

Hi,

what do you want consider?
OpenVZ replacement is LXC in PVE4!

 

[starnetwork]

as good as I understand, the reason that LXC is replace OpenVZ is the EOL of OpenVZ and the leak of support in the new kernels
the virtuozzo v7 looks like very good alternative for that in the near future

maybe it's will be Idea discuss the possibility to use LXC as temporary solution or just add additional support for virtuozzo in one of the next beta versions...

 

[wolfgang]

LXC in or implementation is nearly feature complete and support all kind of storage's.
What benefit virtuozzo should have over LXC?

 

[schannall]

... to use LXC as temporary solution or just add additional support for virtuozzo in one of the next beta versions...

What benefits would that bring to replace LXC with virtuozzo? Why should this be done? What are the drawbacks of LXC in your eyes?
I like the Choice of LXC ( and would welcome the possibility to have Docker containers as well but that is a whole different story

sC

 

[starnetwork]

well, few benefits I can think about Networking limits and management, in general better isolation
good working HA, and out of the box support for lot A wider range of OS and OS versions

 

[starnetwork]

What benefits would that bring to replace LXC with virtuozzo? Why should this be done? What are the drawbacks of LXC in your eyes?
I like the Choice of LXC ( and would welcome the possibility to have Docker containers as well but that is a whole different story

sC

again,
for example:
network / bandwidth limit compare to Virtuozzo
HA
OS compitability, for example for the popular CentOS 7.x you don't need to do anything special with VZ, compare to LXC
and also you have lot more OS templates to select from
time in market and Production experience
more?

 

[wolfgang]

About networking LXC support all features what OpenVZ has and more.
And yes there are more template for OpenVz.But this will change.
And you can also use OpenVz containers on LXC.

 

[starnetwork]

Hi,
about the networking and the isolation, am talking compare to Virtuozzo, not OpenVZ
since we know OpenVZ is EOL, and not relevant...

also, I (and other community members) try to use OpenVZ containers in LXC and it's not work well...

anyway, Virtuozzo Open source is only in first beta, so it's need more time, but I believe for long run, it's can be better part (or grate additional part) for ProxmoxVE

 

[dietmar]

Sure, this is the main reason. But we also want to use newer kernels, and we already moved to 4.1 kernel (virtuozzo uses old 3.10 kernel).

 

[mir]

Another big benefit using LXC. LXC is maintained in the official kernel tree while Virtuozzo is maintained outside of the kernel tree. This means that LXC will develop in parallel with the future kernel versions while Virtuozzo will always be a second class citizen.

 

[starnetwork]

Another big benefit using LXC. LXC is maintained in the official kernel tree while Virtuozzo is maintained outside of the kernel tree. This means that LXC will develop in parallel with the future kernel versions while Virtuozzo will always be a second class citizen.

well, both are very good benefits
1. the office kernel tree is help to do the much more easy maintenance
2. I belive that next versions of Virtuozzo will also supporting Kernel v4.1
3. in my opinion, for Container based Virtual environment, resources limits, focusing on Disk Quota and IO, CPU, Ram and Networking is more important than newest version of the Kernel.

anyway, it's not something to change now, just consider it for let say the next year...

 

[mir]

But all the things you mention which makes Virtuozzo better than LXC is either already implemented or will be at the time of pve4 release.

 

[dietmar]

2. I belive that next versions of Virtuozzo will also supporting Kernel v4.1

They told me the opposite.

 

[spirit]

Hi

again,
for example:

network / bandwidth limit compare to Virtuozzo

can be done on veth interface (like qemu)

HA

we have criu for live migration, and proxmox HA works too

OS compitability, for example for the popular CentOS 7.x you don't need to do anything special with VZ, compare to LXC

Proxmox does the job to detect the os of imported template, and does the need changes.

and also you have lot more OS templates to select from
time in market and Production experience
more?

openvz templates will work on lxc, and official lxc images repository are coming (thanks to ubuntu to push lxc/lxd)

 

[mir]

2. I belive that next versions of Virtuozzo will also supporting Kernel v4.1

Unless Redhat, Suse or Ubuntu picks kernel 4.1 for one of there LTS releases kernel 4.1 will be EOL before Virtuozze releases there next version.

 

[starnetwork]

Nir,
sorry but I didn't find any mention for that in http://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Roadmap
any plan to do better backups with differential backups?
plan for network isolation for LXC Containers?
it's will work with good HA support?
openvswitch?

 

[mir]

openvswitch?

In my pve4 test installation I only use openvswitch. Works flawlessly.

 

[starnetwork]

Hi spirit,
I also suggest to leave maybe both LXC/LXD and Virtuozzo (when it's will be ready)
I believe that native support will be stable and better than GUI patches
but anyway, it's not "black and white" and each of the options have it's own benefits days will tell us what is the best
support both (if possible an not too heavy work), its the "gold" in my opinion

 

[dietmar]

any plan to do better backups with differential backups?

there are plans, but not for 4.0

plan for network isolation for LXC Containers?

that is fully implemented (or what do you talk about exactly)?

it's will work with good HA support?

yes, it works with our new HA stack.

openvswitch?

fully supported

and even better, we support most storage types like zfs, drbd, rdb, ...