Once upon a time, Simon Matter <simon.matter at invoca.ch> said: > I haven't followed oVirt/RHV but I'm wondering how free it is? Is it as > "free" as RHEL or as CentOS/Alma/Rocky/Navy/Oracle Linux? oVirt is the upstream for RHV. Development takes place in oVirt, but (to me anyway) like Fedora, that doesn't mean it is an unfinished or beta product - they do development and have test releases and such. But, like any freely-available software, sometimes you get to find new ways to break it (and then go hunting for help on mailing lists and such). :) I've run oVirt in production for over 6 years (don't actually remember exactly when I started but at least that long). > BTW, from what I know Proxmox does make use of ZFS for some nice features, > does oVirt/RHV have some comparable solutions? All of my oVirt experience has been with external iSCSI storage arrays - my main cluster was a mail server farm for 60K residential users, so we needed TBs of fast storage. oVirt supports a hyperconverged setup with Gluster as well; I set it up once in a lab, but we didn't end up using it (so I can't offer any experience with it). We used to have a TrueNAS (commercial FreeBSD+ZFS storage array), and... we had issues with it. I was not a fan and probably would avoid ZFS and FreeNAS/TrueNAS based on my experiences (but maybe they've gotten better). We hit multiple bugs with it that took a long time to resolve. We were also unhappy with the hardware and its support from iX Systems (the company behind FreeNAS/TrueNAS). Aside from bugs, one drawback of ZFS for me was that, when we needed more storage and added more drives, there was no way to rebalance the space. We ended up getting "hot spots" because a flood of data was written to just the new drives. The ZFS "solution" is just to backup and restore your data (which is not an enterprise or highly available option to me). Rebalance is hard, but I ran DEC Unix back in the day, and their AdvFS not only supported rebalance, it ran it regularly from a cron job (which may have been a hack around the kernel not balancing well to begin with of course). -- Chris Adams <linux at cmadams.net>