[CentOS] KVM vs ESXi

Thu May 19 10:56:46 UTC 2011
Michael Simpson <mikie.simpson at gmail.com>

On 19 May 2011 05:39, Lucian <lucian at lastdot.org> wrote:

> No and I don't think it's the hypervisor's job to do that. Even in
> ESXi I don't think it's the "hypervisor" itself that does that. You
> could try however to mess with Openvswitch if you insist on such
> features, at least until someone decides to package all this in one
> fancy solution (rhev?).
thank you for pointing out openvswitch very interesting

wrt the OP

KVM is meant to be much closer to bare metal performance but doesn't
have (at the moment) the all inclusive, easily managed from one
console, turnkey solution to massive virtual installs at the
datacentre level. If you need to be able to remotely provision VMs and
move them whilst live from one centre to another whilst upscaling them
then you will probably need to go with vmware.  If you have got the
flattened layer2 setup and have got to the stage of using vSwitch or
the full cisco stack including provisioned nexus1000v then you might
find kvm is a bit of a step backwards.

However i would recommend having a KVM based test suite as judging by
the latest PaaS and IaaS news coming from TUV then a full solution
will be appearing real soon and may be a contender.

If you are just looking to footer about and are after a provisioned
host in a dmz then libvirt can achieve this.