----- "Pasi Kärkkäinen" pasik@iki.fi wrote:
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 09:04:20AM -0500, Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu wrote:
Why would one use ConVirt instead of the management tools included in RHEL and/or CentOS? What's the difference?
RHEL/CentOS doesn't provide web-based management.. or even easy multi-host / cluster management of virtualization nodes.
-- Pasi
Are there any *good* reasons? (Since I really hate commercials, I feel compelled to present my contrarian viewpoint.) ConVirt addresses a pretty small portion of the virtualization landscape, and it consists of only a few significant parts:
1. Do what other free and open tools already do. 2. Slap a web interface on it! 3. Spam lists. 4. Rope in suckers.
The suggestion that a web interface is a value add to an infrastructure issue is at least insulting. You could attempt to slap a web interface on a fuel injection system (or maybe at least give access to the magic a la MegaSquirt), but a bunch of assholes are still going to blow something up. It's not going to give any admin worth his or her salt a boner because it's not readily scriptable and it amounts to candy for retards. Secondly, everything else that it does is already there. If you can't do it, you shouldn't be touching the machines.
The tool may or may not address some vanilla installations (if there ever was one), but if you need something like that, you are probably better off with EC2 or at least letting someone else handle it.
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 12:54 AM, Christopher G. Stach II cgs@ldsys.netwrote:
----- "Pasi Kärkkäinen" pasik@iki.fi wrote:
RHEL/CentOS doesn't provide web-based management.. or even easy multi-host / cluster management of virtualization nodes.
-- Pasi
Are there any *good* reasons? (Since I really hate commercials, I feel compelled to present my contrarian viewpoint.) ConVirt addresses a pretty small portion of the virtualization landscape, and it consists of only a few significant parts:
- Do what other free and open tools already do.
- Slap a web interface on it!
- Spam lists.
- Rope in suckers.
The suggestion that a web interface is a value add to an infrastructure issue is at least insulting. You could attempt to slap a web interface on a fuel injection system (or maybe at least give access to the magic a la MegaSquirt), but a bunch of assholes are still going to blow something up. It's not going to give any admin worth his or her salt a boner because it's not readily scriptable and it amounts to candy for retards. Secondly, everything else that it does is already there. If you can't do it, you shouldn't be touching the machines.
The tool may or may not address some vanilla installations (if there ever was one), but if you need something like that, you are probably better off with EC2 or at least letting someone else handle it.
-- Christopher G. Stach II http://ldsys.net/~cgs/ http://ldsys.net/%7Ecgs/
As these tools become more mature I'd like to see some comparisons because I too get a little tired of all the hype surrounding 20 tools that do exactly the same thing. I played with Convirt quite a while ago but it either didn't install right or didn't work right. Version 2.0 looks better. But then we have Eucalyptus, Enomalism, Convirt, Orchestra, Xen Admin, DTC-Xen, Cloudmin and I'd guess a whole bunch more. I wrote my own for classroom purposes that reads a roster and lets me act on whole classes of machines. I didn't release it because I think we have enough Xen guis. What we need to do is combine resources and make one real GOOD one.
Grant McWilliams
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 02:54:53AM -0600, Christopher G. Stach II wrote:
----- "Pasi Kärkkäinen" pasik@iki.fi wrote:
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 09:04:20AM -0500, Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu wrote:
Why would one use ConVirt instead of the management tools included in RHEL and/or CentOS? What's the difference?
RHEL/CentOS doesn't provide web-based management.. or even easy multi-host / cluster management of virtualization nodes.
-- Pasi
Are there any *good* reasons? (Since I really hate commercials, I feel compelled to present my contrarian viewpoint.) ConVirt addresses a pretty small portion of the virtualization landscape, and it consists of only a few significant parts:
- Do what other free and open tools already do.
- Slap a web interface on it!
- Spam lists.
- Rope in suckers.
The suggestion that a web interface is a value add to an infrastructure issue is at least insulting. You could attempt to slap a web interface on a fuel injection system (or maybe at least give access to the magic a la MegaSquirt), but a bunch of assholes are still going to blow something up. It's not going to give any admin worth his or her salt a boner because it's not readily scriptable and it amounts to candy for retards. Secondly, everything else that it does is already there. If you can't do it, you shouldn't be touching the machines.
The tool may or may not address some vanilla installations (if there ever was one), but if you need something like that, you are probably better off with EC2 or at least letting someone else handle it.
You have some good points here. An user API is absolutely a requirement for system like this, to let the powerusers/admins script things and create custom management scripts.
Web interface frontend should/could be using the same API!
-- Pasi
Thanks for sharing your view points.
You are right, If some one wants to make a mess.. they can do it as easily with Web interface as with command line tools.
As far as *good* reasons why you may want to consider ConVirt 2.0 for your needs, please see the following url,
http://convirture.com/products_opensource.html
Feel free to compare it with other open source tools and give suggestions on what you would like to see.
Just a side note, one announcement per release is hardly be categorized under "spamming" or "commercials".
--- On Sun, 3/7/10, Christopher G. Stach II cgs@ldsys.net wrote:
From: Christopher G. Stach II cgs@ldsys.net Subject: Re: [CentOS-virt] Introducing ConVirt 2.0 To: "Discussion about the virtualization on CentOS" centos-virt@centos.org Date: Sunday, March 7, 2010, 12:54 AM ----- "Pasi Kärkkäinen" pasik@iki.fi wrote:
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 09:04:20AM -0500, Kanwar
Ranbir Sandhu wrote:
Why would one use ConVirt instead of the
management tools included in
RHEL and/or CentOS? What's the difference?
RHEL/CentOS doesn't provide web-based management.. or
even easy
multi-host / cluster management of virtualization
nodes.
-- Pasi
Are there any *good* reasons? (Since I really hate commercials, I feel compelled to present my contrarian viewpoint.) ConVirt addresses a pretty small portion of the virtualization landscape, and it consists of only a few significant parts:
- Do what other free and open tools already do.
- Slap a web interface on it!
- Spam lists.
- Rope in suckers.
The suggestion that a web interface is a value add to an infrastructure issue is at least insulting. You could attempt to slap a web interface on a fuel injection system (or maybe at least give access to the magic a la MegaSquirt), but a bunch of assholes are still going to blow something up. It's not going to give any admin worth his or her salt a boner because it's not readily scriptable and it amounts to candy for retards. Secondly, everything else that it does is already there. If you can't do it, you shouldn't be touching the machines.
The tool may or may not address some vanilla installations (if there ever was one), but if you need something like that, you are probably better off with EC2 or at least letting someone else handle it.
-- Christopher G. Stach II http://ldsys.net/~cgs/ _______________________________________________ CentOS-virt mailing list CentOS-virt@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 12:28 PM, jd jdsw2002@yahoo.com wrote:
Thanks for sharing your view points.
You are right, If some one wants to make a mess.. they can do it as easily with Web interface as with command line tools.
As far as *good* reasons why you may want to consider ConVirt 2.0 for your needs, please see the following url,
http://convirture.com/products_opensource.html
Feel free to compare it with other open source tools and give suggestions on what you would like to see.
Just a side note, one announcement per release is hardly be categorized under "spamming" or "commercials".
Product websites rarely answer any questions about the product because they're too general. The word commercial comes to mind in that regard because you can read the product description and still have no idea what it does and even more importantly what it doesn't do. Nobody wants to advertise what their product doesn't do. For example
**New* Multi-user administration* ConVirt 2.0 Open Source enables you to share responsibility for managing the virtualized environment between multiple administrators while maintaining full accountability. Each administrator has his or her own login and all of the actions they perform are being continuously audited.
This tells me that we can have more than one person administering the VMs and we know what they're doing as well. Does this also mean we can restrict said administrators so Bob can only administer VM1 and VM2 but not VM3? Who knows. Maybe this is just a sudo group that has control of the VM commands and they're being run as root. If that's the case I can do that with a one liner in sudoers so it doesn't really solve anything.
I think this is the general feeling about URLs to product websites. The real information ends up being gathered in forums like this one or by going through the laborious process of trying out every singe Xen GUI interface before you finally decide to write your own.
Grant McWilliams
-
Christopher G. Stach II -
Grant McWilliams -
jd -
Karanbir Singh -
Pasi Kärkkäinen