Use Xen or KVM for guests on beta6?

[Garani]

I still have to install unRaid 6 beta6, but I started visualising what to virtualise over the unRaid box.

 

I am a KVM believer, and I am in favour of KVM vms. But I can see that unRaid pushes Xen a lot.

 

What would be the best effort in your opinion? Try to get KVM working on unRaid Host, or move everything over to Xen?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[itimpi]

At the moment the jury is out as to whether unRAID will include Xen or KVM (or both) support long term.  The current beta 6 gives you the option of booting with either KVM or Xen support so you can currently experiment with both technologies.   

 

My guess is that at some point LimeTech will issue a policy statement stating what their plans are in this area, and until then we are just helping test the two options to get more data on how well they run.

 

Whether you boot with Xen or KVM support you also get Docker support.  It is looking as though Docker is going to be the technology pushed for many things that were previously done with plugins.

[Garani]

Docker seems quite useful, I agree.

 

It is just that certain things (Firewall, WebServer/Mail server) are not quite for docker, IMHO.

 

Certainly running a firewall under Xen seems to be a real nightmare, and the router's firewall does not have sufficient features for me (VPNs for starters).

 

Seems that I'll have to play with it a bit more, before starting to consolidate my home network.

[eek]

There are a number of people on here who used Xen on beta 5 who have had problems with Xen on beta 6 and have had to revert back.

 

While Docker is looking like the sensible plugin replacement, I don't think we can sensibly recommend one of Xen / KVM at the moment. Although I expect KVM is going to be the winner that could all change with the next beta.

[dlandon]

I am currently using a Xen VM (IronicBadger's Debian VM) for ownCloud, Logitech Media Server, Airvideo, and some personal web hosting.  I'm hoping that Xen stays as an option because it is working beautifully for me and I don't have the time to convert it to KVM.

 

EDIT: I'm still on b5a because of the Xen net-back "BUG" issue in b6.

[eek]

I am currently using a Xen VM (IronicBadger's Debian VM) for ownCloud, Logitech Media Server, Airvideo, and some personal web hosting.  I'm hoping that Xen stays as an option because it is working beautifully for me and I don't have the time to convert it to KVM.

 

I'm in the same boat and stuck on beta 5 as Xen wasn't stable for me on beta 6. Most of my VMs would happily run as dockers (sab, sickbeard, couch potato) so I'm not that concerned as to the final Xen / KVM decision but I don't think this release is a sensible time to pick a runner.

[Garani]

I understand that things are a bit too raw at the moment, and I don't expect any clear indication before year end.

 

I do understand why choosing KVM (currently de facto Linux standard) over Xen. Not so sure of the contrary, given that without a Xen's aware kernel thinks get a bit bloody (firewalls are one of this special apps: you don't mess with their kernel. Ever)

 

In the end my main issue is with the firewall vm: it is the only one that would have issues with Xen, IMHO.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grumpybutfun]

I do understand why choosing KVM (currently de facto Linux standard) over Xen. Not so sure of the contrary, given that without a Xen's aware kernel thinks get a bit bloody (firewalls are one of this special apps: you don't mess with their kernel. Ever)

 

Xen is technically cleaner and easier to support than KVM.

 

All the KVM updates are done via the Kernel (you think Enterprises want to have to install / update the Linux Kernel on 1,000+ servers to fix a KVM issue?) and dozens of Linux Packages / Programs. Where as with Xen, you update one Xen Package.

 

In the end my main issue is with the firewall vm: it is the only one that would have issues with Xen, IMHO.

 

You are painting Xen with a pretty broad brush and it's common for people here in unRAID to do so with Linux / Linux Technologies. unRAID after all is their only experience / knowledge / use of this "stuff".

 

Your issue is not a Xen one and KVM will have the same one too.

 

Your issues:

 

Infrastructure - Your router / switch / Xen or KVM configuration / VM configuration / firewall / etc.

 

unRAID - Their implementation of Xen / Slackware / emhttp (WebGUI) only allow you to do so much of what Xen or KVM can do.

 

Solution(s):

 

You can assign NICs, MAC Addresses, IP Addresses (gateways, subnets, etc.) to individual VMs but the WebGUI doesn't allow you to do this currently. You will have to do it manually in Slackware / VM Configuration. Meaning... Eth1 could be assigned to a WordPress VM (or you could create a bridge and use it for several VMs that hang out on the web) and manually assign a subnet, gateway, etc. that is isolated from your home network.

 

unRAID is using a network bridge instead of Open vSwitch. Xen and KVM can both use Open vSwitch and since it's a software switch running on your host (unRAID) you would have A LOT more flexibility / control over how / what your network(s) do  for your VMs.

 

Where do you want the firewall to sit? On your router? On the switch? On the Host? Each VM have their own?

 

Let's assume you have a blog running Wordpress and you want to hang it out on the web. You could install a NIC in your unRAID. Tell your router to put that NIC MAC Address in the DMZ. Within Slackware / Xen / VM Configuration you either use DHCP or manually assign IP, gateway, subnet, etc. If WordPress is running on CentOS, install / use CentOS's firewall to suit your needs.

 

In either Xen or KVM... Your VMs and NICs can be isolated and you can separate your networks if you want too. It's how and where you choose to do it. Open vSwitch would be helpful but you can still install a separate NIC and accomplish your goal for either 1 or many VMs. Firewall you can do it on your router, switch, Slackware / unRAID, within each VM or all of the above.

 

Hope this helps.

[Garani]

Well, I still have to really design the new network. The real challenge will be moving from my current physical firewall to a virtual one. We will see how it works out.

 

Regarding Xen vs KVM, I am still convinced of the superiority of KVM: big companies don't care about Linux virtualisation: they work on VMware and that is all. The current push is into clouding, trying to overcome current limits of host hardware, but that is another matter, and openstack is the current lead player, and is focusing on KVM.

 

Given current state of processors, KVM makes transition between hosts a lot simpler then pv/Xen. But the road is long.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bkastner]

Regarding Xen vs KVM, I am still convinced of the superiority of KVM: big companies don't care about Linux virtualisation: they work on VMware and that is all. The current push is into clouding, trying to overcome current limits of host hardware, but that is another matter, and openstack is the current lead player, and is focusing on KVM.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

That is not really true. VMware does have a large lead, but it's shrinking, and Hyper-V and Xen (through Citrix XenServer) do have a footprint, and both are larger than KVM.

 

Try looking at Gartner's magic quadrant from last year.

 

http://virtualization.info/en/news/2013/07/gartner-releases-its-2013-magic-quadrant-for-x86-server-virtualization-infrastructure.html

 

VMware is in the lead, followed close by Microsoft and Citrix is up there as well in the visionaries quadrant. KVM is represented by Red Hat, and where do you find them on the chart? Dragging the ass end.

 

KVM may well grow (just as Xen has dropped somewhat), but it's definitely not ESX or nothing anymore.

[grumpybutfun]

Regarding Xen vs KVM, I am still convinced of the superiority of KVM:

 

Care to explain why that is?

 

You are aware that KVM and Xen both use QEMU for Machine Emulation and SeaBIOS for Bio emulation, right? The only difference really is the management tools. WITHOUT a doubt Xen kicks KVM's ass everyday of the week and twice on Sunday when it comes to the Commercial and Opensource management tools. Unlike Xen, KVM is all over the place and there is no single Organization or Structure for it and it's bleeding edge (lots of bugs, no alpha / beta testing, etc.) KVM is just a bunch of random people working on the KVM part of the Linux Kernel and various Apps that both Xen and KVM use.

 

The advantages that KVM has over Xen technically are VirtFS and PCI Passthrough due to the fact they run the latest and greatest QEMU (which to many companies / people ISN'T a good thing).

 

big companies don't care about Linux virtualisation: they work on VMware and that is all.

 

Companies no longer care about it, huh? I happen to get paid a small fortune as a consultant for Virtualization and Outsourcing for Fortune 100 companies and deal with 100,000+ servers / VMs deployments everyday and based on what my clients business objectives are for the next 5 / 10 years... I don't see me enrolling in Truck Driver school anytime in the near future. 

 

You really believe that companies do not care about their Intellectual Property and they "outsourcing" things like ERP, Email, Document Management, Accounting, R&D, Development, CRM, Sales Force Automation, etc. to third party providers and hanging all of that out on the web?

 

Sure, a lot of companies are "outsourcing" where they can and where it makes business sense but you are dreaming if you think you are going to see "server free" Small / Medium / Enterprises anytime soon. I have not spoken to a CEO / COO / CIO that is going to stick their entire BILLION dollar company and their Intellectual Property out on the Web for Competition / Hackers to hack / steal. Example: Microsoft didn't stop using "clean" rooms for software development. They didn't create a private GitHub account and now have all their developers sitting in their PJs working from home on Windows 9. That is NEVER EVER going to happen.

 

Also, VMware has been getting their ass handed too them by Hyper-V and Xen. Technology / Feature wise Hyper-V as a whole has caught up and passed VMWare. Not to mention, it's a hell of a lot cheaper too. Almost every single one of the clients I know is either thinking of or in the process of leaving VMware for Hyper-V or Xen. VMware was a monopoly and they got lazy / selfish and started holding their customers hostage with their INSANE pricing / licensing structure and why people are jumping ship as quickly as they can. They still haven't figured it out and with the latest ESXi release they pulled the same stunt with their home / lab users (it's now crippleware).

 

The current push is into clouding, trying to overcome current limits of host hardware, but that is another matter, and openstack is the current lead player, and is focusing on KVM.

 

LOL! I love how people throw cloud computing around. Talk to 10 CIOs and you get 10 different answers of what they think Cloud is. You also have internal Clouds, External ones, Third Party ones, etc. Regardless of where the cloud sits / is, those still sit on top of servers and those servers are virtualized.

 

Regarding Openstack... It's a management tool / platform. It combines Server Management, Virtualization, Object Storage, Block Storage, etc. into one tool / platform. It's combining all the various Linux Software, Apps, Tools, Orchestration, HA, Server Management across multiple nodes into a nice pretty package. VMware, Citrix, Hyper-V, Joyent, etc. can also do this too.

 

For the record, Openstack is OPEN and there is no default or single Hypervisor. You can use Xen, XenServer, Hyper-V, VMware, KVM for your choice in Hypervisor or have a mixture of all 5 if you want. You either use a commercial /  third party tools (which a lot of companies do) or libvirt to integrate it.

[bkastner]

...

 

Don't you love people who read a few online articles and can pontificate without a clue as to what they are talking about.

 

 

[Garani]

Sigh, why should I start debating on who is more right on this stuff?

 

We both do what we do for a living, and I will not humor you of who is better: KVM or Xen.

 

I have my ideas, I use unRaid in my home, I think I am entitled to make my choice knowing my needs and capabilities, am I not?

 

In my company's network (yeah, fortune 100 here too) I would never suggest unRaid: it isn't the right tool for their job.

 

But then again, Xen or KVM? It is like debating witch computer is better. Well, guess what? I pull out of this kids race: been there, done that.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grumpybutfun]

But then again, Xen or KVM? It is like debating witch computer is better. Well, guess what? I pull out of this kids race: been there, done that.

 

For home use, I agree. Are people going to take advantage of the say the High Availability features that Xen offers? Nope.

 

I am a big fan of KVM and I use it on one of my servers. What I will say, is KVM is a lot more complicated than Xen in setting up VMs and that will become very apparent when people start posting their configuration files for it. Which is why unRAID is struggling with KVM (VFIO and all the various package / configurations and settings required for libvirt) and getting that into a webGUI.

 

Proof of what I am saying:

 

KVM

 

/opt/qemu-git/bin/qemu-system-x86_64 -enable-kvm -M q35 \
-m 8196 -mem-prealloc -mem-path /mnt/hugepages \
-cpu Opteron_G5 \
-smp 4,sockets=1,cores=2,threads=2 \
-bios /root/kvm-vga-passthrough/vfio-post3.13/seabios/seabios/out/bios.bin -vga none \
-boot order=cd,menu=on \
-device ioh3420,bus=pcie.0,addr=1c.0,multifunction=on,port=1,chassis=1,id=root.1 \
-device vfio-pci,host=04:00.0,bus=root.1,addr=00.0,multifunction=on,x-vga=on \
-device vfio-pci,host=00:1d.0,bus=root.1,addr=00.1 \
-device vfio-pci,host=00:1b.0,bus=root.1,addr=00.2 \
-device ahci,bus=pcie.0,id=ahci \
-netdev bridge,br=br0,id=hostnet0 \
-device virtio-net-pci,netdev=hostnet0,id=net0 \
-drive file=/var/lib/libvirt/images/kubuntu_1404_x64-disk01.qcow2,id=disk,format=qcow2 -device ide-hd,bus=ahci.0,drive=disk \
-drive file=/var/lib/libvirt/images/kubuntu_1404_x64-disk02.qcow2,id=disk02,format=qcow2 -device ide-hd,bus=ahci.1,drive=disk02 \
-drive file=/var/lib/libvirt/images/kubuntu-14.04-desktop-amd64.iso,id=isocd -device ide-cd,bus=ahci.2,drive=isocd

 

Xen

 

name = "rhel"
memory = "2048"
disk = [ 'tap:aio:/var/lib/xen/images/rhel5b2vm01.dsk,xvda,w', ]
vif = [ 'mac=00:16:3e:33:79:3c, bridge=xenbr0', ]
vnc=1
bootloader="/usr/bin/pygrub"
vcpus=2
on_reboot   = 'restart'
on_crash    = 'restart'

[Garani]

So you are comparing a line command with a config file? Ok.

 

Just for the record (now I am with a computer in front of me and can quote):

KVM may well grow (just as Xen has dropped somewhat), but it's definitely not ESX or nothing anymore.

 

ESX or death. This is what swings the boat in old Europe. Having said that, VMware is a real pain in the ass, but has got paid support, it has got to value for something, don't you think? (I am being sarcastic here)

 

You really believe that companies do not care about their Intellectual Property and they "outsourcing" things like ERP, Email, Document Management, Accounting, R&D, Development, CRM, Sales Force Automation, etc. to third party providers and hanging all of that out on the web?

 

You don't know, you just don't know. I have seen things (and still seeing them happening today)...

 

And regarding the "cloud", I have always called bullshit, but that's where the money is going, and that's where the shit is going to hit the fan, IMHO.

 

Now, coming back to the subject at hand, I frankly don't care who is the better, Xen or KVM, as long as it works over unRaid. I have no interest whatsoever to be dragged in a "I am right, you are wrong" competition, it was not the intention of this thread and I'd rather prefer to see it locked then to go down that avenue.

 

Point is: beta6 works with KVM, Beta5a is what needs to be used if I want to work with Xen. First I have to make sure that neither one of the other have the old nasty NFS Stale Filesystem issue, then I will make a choice between bleeding edge (beta6) or a less bleeding edge (beta5a) and then I'll decide on the hypervisor.

 

Thank a lot to you all for the time and effort.

[bkastner]

So you are comparing a line command with a config file? Ok.

 

Just for the record (now I am with a computer in front of me and can quote):

KVM may well grow (just as Xen has dropped somewhat), but it's definitely not ESX or nothing anymore.

 

ESX or death. This is what swings the boat in old Europe. Having said that, VMware is a real pain in the ass, but has got paid support, it has got to value for something, don't you think? (I am being sarcastic here)

 

VMware used to be "the sh!t", but like every other big company who owns massive market share they let that go to their head and started putting stupid restrictions and licensing models in place. I definitely give VMware credit for helping drive server virtualization to where it is today - they are also well positioned in the cloud space as they seem to have a solid solution.

 

Microsoft has made large strides, but still don't have as complete a cloud based solution (unless you are using Azure), but offering free Hyper-V which as gotten better and better is definitely making a dent in VMware's market share (at least in corporate data centers).

 

Honestly, I can't see Xen or KVM really going anywhere fast. Citrix XenServer is a pretty good product, but seems to be a lower priority for Citrix (vs XenDesktop) and that is likely going to be the downfall of the pre-packaged Xen product (i.e. I haven't even seen any reference to a XenServer using Xen 4.4 yet).

 

I do agree that Cloud is the new cool buzzword - even though many don't understand what it actually entails, and everyone seems to have their own idea of what moving to the cloud actually means. Grumpy is right in that many companies are not going to just push their data to the cloud where they don't have control, and I don't see public cloud being the solution for many, whereas private cloud and converged infrastructure make a lot of sense. I also think that "aaS" be it IaaS, SaaS or whatever other "aaS" (or as a service) type model will likely grow.

 

The point is that while server virtualization and even cloud looked to be a one man show (VMware) this is still up for debate. 3 years ago it was VMware or nothing, now people have options which are good for everyone.

 

Lastly, sorry for turning this into a "I am right, you are wrong" discussion. It did take this conversation down an unproductive path that really wasn't necessary.

[Garani]

Bkastner, I couldn't have said it any better. What you wrote reflects my (business) position 100%.

 

But when you see one of the first 10 world banks moving to private clouds that sit on a very well known public cloud infrastructure, you wonder where things started to go wrong.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Owel]

Hi, I'm new to unraid VMs.

 

But with the new beta, I want to give VMs a try.

I have serveral VMs in mind. Can you tell me, what I Should choose? KVM or XEN?

 

I read the whole thread and the conclusion is, that both are there and no one knows what the next steps will be. So it is a 50/50% game on which horse i will bet?

 

Owel

[Garani]

With kvm there are a few config issues at the moment. The virtual networks are not set up at boot time, and if you try to access it via KVM virt manager from another host it doesn't support qemu+ssh, which is a royal pain

 

Having said that, I am still in the process of trying to understand how the "darn" thing works, and I am having some real fun in the challenge

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Abnorm]

Hi, I'm new to unraid VMs.

 

But with the new beta, I want to give VMs a try.

I have serveral VMs in mind. Can you tell me, what I Should choose? KVM or XEN?

 

I read the whole thread and the conclusion is, that both are there and no one knows what the next steps will be. So it is a 50/50% game on which horse i will bet?

 

Owel

 

If you are just testing stuff and have no idea what you are doing, go for unraid 6 beta 5, it runs xen, it's easier and more information is available on the forum for setting it up.

Been running xen stable since may or something, no issues (except some bsod's now and again on my windows vm).

there's not a "who's"-better scenario right now as i see it, but xen is easier.

[JustinChase]

Hi, I'm new to unraid VMs.

 

But with the new beta, I want to give VMs a try.

I have serveral VMs in mind. Can you tell me, what I Should choose? KVM or XEN?

 

I read the whole thread and the conclusion is, that both are there and no one knows what the next steps will be. So it is a 50/50% game on which horse i will bet?

 

Owel

 

If you are just testing stuff and have no idea what you are doing, go for unraid 6 beta 5, it runs xen, it's easier and more information is available on the forum for setting it up.

Been running xen stable since may or something, no issues (except some bsod's now and again on my windows vm).

there's not a "who's"-better scenario right now as i see it, but xen is easier.

 

I would agree with this.  beta6 added KVM, but seems to have 'broke' XEN in such a way that I've not had any luck getting a windows VM running with passthru on either KVM or XEN with beta6.

 

With that said, if your reason for wanting to run a VM is just to get SABnzbd and other 'essential' programs running, install beta6 and just use docker, as it handles this REALLY well.

[itimpi]

Hi, I'm new to unraid VMs.

 

But with the new beta, I want to give VMs a try.

I have serveral VMs in mind. Can you tell me, what I Should choose? KVM or XEN?

 

I read the whole thread and the conclusion is, that both are there and no one knows what the next steps will be. So it is a 50/50% game on which horse i will bet?

what do you want VM's for?  If it is for things that are have in the past been done with plugins, then you probably want to go with beta 6 and try the Docker containers instead.  It is looking almost certain that Docker will be the mechanism that replaces most of what in the past has been done with plugins.

 

True VM's are really only required if you want to run a non-Linux OS (e.g. Windows) on the same box as unRAID.

[bkastner]

Hi, I'm new to unraid VMs.

 

But with the new beta, I want to give VMs a try.

I have serveral VMs in mind. Can you tell me, what I Should choose? KVM or XEN?

 

I read the whole thread and the conclusion is, that both are there and no one knows what the next steps will be. So it is a 50/50% game on which horse i will bet?

what do you want VM's for?  If it is for things that are have in the past been done with plugins, then you probably want to go with beta 6 and try the Docker containers instead.  It is looking almost certain that Docker will be the mechanism that replaces most of what in the past has been done with plugins.

 

True VM's are really only required if you want to run a non-Linux OS (e.g. Windows) on the same box as unRAID.

 

I would agree with this. Especially since IronicBadger has taken his repository offline. I had been running the Xen VM since IB first published it, but wanted to add something new and with IB's repository offline it's a bit more of a pain in the ass. It got me to try moving things over to Docker which is really easy to do (provided you have a BTFRS drive to use).

 

[PeterB]

True VM's are really only required if you want to run a non-Linux OS (e.g. Windows) on the same box as unRAID.

 

Can docker run a Linux system with gui, accessed via vnc?

[Owel]

what do you want VM's for?

 

I want  VMs for: TVHeadend, JDownloader, TheRenamer, EMM, XBMC Database, OwnCloud