I can only speak for me why we are moving to KVM. It starts with license costs which will be an issue once you have several hundred hosts like I have. Going on we were a big "Citrix" Xen shop but after issues with Citrix Xenserver 6 (XCP variant) like openvswitch performance issues, XAPI communication issues between VMs and hypervisor we decided to switch. Overall important is stability above features and another big plus for
KVM is you can easily roll out bare metal via Kickstart and Puppet/Chef a option we only discovered recently for xenserver. Now is xenserver free but there were still enough issues in the past for us to even consider it again. On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 8:24 AM, Vahric Muhtaryan <vah...@doruk.net.tr>wrote: > Hello All , > > Sorry for this stupid question but i really wonder why KVM is used or > trying > to use as a hypervisor option. (Sorry for out of scope of this list) but > try > to learn people understandings, also i do not want to say do not use it :D > Mostly third party supported hypervisor is vmware > XenServer and Hyper-v is i guess mostly third party supported hypervisors > Then i can see the KVM , because of mostly IBM focus on it > > My point of view ; > Using iscsi, FC is a problem because need shared mount point > No internal DRS or WLB or kind of distributing algorithm. > Backup , no any 3th party software i know support KVM > If we start to talk about Disaster Recovery finding solution should be very > hard > If its free Citrix XenServer is free > > I¹m confusing when i think all , i don¹t know any performance pluses then > the other hypervisors but i don¹t know how to compare it with all such > parameters > Of course every people have their own ideas but could you pls share it to > understand better. > > Regards > VM > > > >
