Survey: Proxmox VE Kernel with or without OpenVZ?

[martin]

Hi all!

Proxmox VE uses currently a 2.6.24 based Kernel. Due to the limitations of OpenVZ there is no actual Kernel possible (OpenVZ 2.6.26/27 are quite similar and also quite old).

So the question is, should we go for the latest Kernel to get the latest and greatest KVM functionality and best hardware support?

What do you think? Please vote!

 

[ellenverheyen]

This would mean loosing the openvz capabilities?

 

[dietmar]

This would mean loosing the openvz capabilities?

without OpenVZ ==> no openvz capabilities

 

[diaolin]

what about removing openvz and creating a single kvm machine with openvz support?
(automagically, of course, and manageable from interface)

 

[tom]

what about removing openvz and creating a single kvm machine with openvz support?
(automagically, of course, and manageable from interface)

you can already install Proxmox VE as a KVM guest inside Proxmox VE.

 

[resignation]

Tom,

What about providing 2 kernel choices during the installation process, one defined as KVM/OpenVZ (2.6.24) and the other as KVM only (2.6.30+)?

I would hate to lose the ability and functionality of OpenVZ VMs, but if these limitations were selectable during the installation process it would be the best of both worlds.

If this were the case with multiple kernels via installation, it would still be nice to be able to cluster the Proxmox VE OpenVZ/KVM and KVM only physical machines for live migration of containers/VMs.

Thanks

 

[valshare]

Hi,

will the OpenVZ function forever lost in Proxmox?

Regards, Valle

 

[tom]

Tom,

What about providing 2 kernel choices during the installation process, one defined as KVM/OpenVZ (2.6.24) and the other as KVM only (2.6.30+)?

I would hate to lose the ability and functionality of OpenVZ VMs, but if these limitations were selectable during the installation process it would be the best of both worlds.

If this were the case with multiple kernels via installation, it would still be nice to be able to cluster the Proxmox VE OpenVZ/KVM and KVM only physical machines for live migration of containers/VMs.

Thanks

in principle, a good idea. but having two Kernel you are doubling the efforts for Kernel building and testing, management tools, etc.

 

[andio]

To have two kernel branches is a bad idea because of binding too much developing and especially test ressources.

For me OpenVZ support is essential because OS container virtualization has the best performance and is the main reason to use proxmox.

...Com'on OpenVZ guys get your work done!

 

[andio]

There is an option missing in the survey:

Isn't there the possibility to go with a newer kernel (not always the latest one) but keep OpenVZ Support?

 

[tom]

There is an option missing in the survey:

Isn't there the possibility to go with a newer kernel (not always the latest one) but keep OpenVZ Support?

there is no OpenVZ Kernel support for newer Kernels so this option does not exists. For KVM at least 2.6.29 would be nice.

 

[tom]

Hi,

will the OpenVZ function forever lost in Proxmox?

Regards, Valle

this is a survey only. there is no plan to eliminate anything in the moment.

 

[andio]

there is no OpenVZ Kernel support for newer Kernels so this option does not exists. For KVM at least 2.6.29 would be nice.

I think at least for 2.6.26 there is the possibility to use OpenVZ (it's included in Lenny)

 

[conrad]

At the moment 90 percent of the usages are containers. I think the
openvz part makes proxmox interesting for me. So loosing the openvz
part would be very disapointing.

Maybe it would be an idea 2 make to versions (install option).
kvm and openvz?

 

[Maxnet]

Was wondering if the 2.6.27 OpenVZ kernel is stable enough to be used.

I know it's marked as "development, not for production environments" on wiki.openvz.org.
But so is 2.6.24.

 

[tux]

I have three server with Proxmox and ONLY OpenVZ Contrainers. I like OpenVZ because the administration is very easy - and i have directly access to the "harddisk" of a contrainer.

Next Point : Performance! OpenVZ is faster then KVM - if you only use Linux!

Please dont remove OpenVZ - at the moment (i think!) Proxmox is the only solution for an OpenVZ infrastructure.

 

[resignation]

in principle, a good idea. but having two Kernel you are doubling the efforts for Kernel building and testing, management tools, etc.

Agreed, but I believe the real strenght of this project is the intergration of both virtualization technologies into a single product. Dropping OpenVZ support would be a big blow to the project and userbase in general.

Is it possible to upgrade KVM to the newest release (KVM-88) under 2.6.24, or are we stuck with that release until OpenVZ has an updated kernel as well?

 

[diaolin]

you can already install Proxmox VE as a KVM guest inside Proxmox VE.

I know, it was only an opinion about upgrading the actual kernel withouth openvz
and creating a dedicate openvz kvm machine.
Simply...

 

[tom]

Agreed, but I believe the real strenght of this project is the intergration of both virtualization technologies into a single product. Dropping OpenVZ support would be a big blow to the project and userbase in general.

yes.

Is it possible to upgrade KVM to the newest release (KVM-88) under 2.6.24, or are we stuck with that release until OpenVZ has an updated kernel as well?

KVM 88 has some drawbacks, we will not integrate it. We always test KVM releases and if there is a more stable version we release it after testing in our labs. The first 'stable' KVM is expected in September so we will see if this also for Proxmox VE - I assume yes.

 

[user100]

If I have to choose between the two options I would prefer the newer kernel. But between those lines I would prefer a 2.6.27 kernel with support for both.