On 26.01.2021 0:05, Scott Dowdle wrote: >> OpenVZ 7 has no updates, and therefore is not suitable for production. > The free updates lag behind the paid Virtuozzo 7 version and plenty of people are using it in production. I'm not one of those. See all released OpenVZ 7 updates: http://ftp.netinch.com/pub/openvz/virtuozzo/releases/ Lag between two serial updates can be up to 4-5 month. OpenVZ 7 has many other disadvantages, so I can't use it for production. >> LXC/LXD is the same technology, as I understand from linuxcontainers.org > LXD is a management layer on top of it which provides for easy clustering and even managing VMs. I think it is the closest thing to vzctl/prlctl from OpenVZ. "Yes, you could use LXC without LXD. But you probably would not want to. On its own, LXC will give you only a basic subset of features. For a production environment, you’ll want to use LXD". >> podman can't be a replacement for OpenVZ 6 / systemd-nspawn because >> it destroys the root filesystem on the container stop, and all >> changes made in container configs and other container files will be lost. >> This is a nightmare for the website hosting server with containers. > No, it does NOT destroy the delta disk (that's what I call where changes are stored) upon container stop and I'm not sure why you think it does. You can even export a systemd unit file to manage the container as a systemd service or user service. volumes are a nice way to handle persistence of data if you want to nuke the existing container and make a new one from scratch without losing your data. While it is true you have to approach the container a little differently, podman systemd containers are fairly reasonable "system containers". podman is replacement for Docker, it is not replacement for OpenVZ 6 containers. I have containers with 1.6 TiB of valuable data - podman not designed to work in this mode and in such conditions. So I have only two alternatives for OS-level virtualization: LXC or systemd-nspawn. -- Best regards, Gena