Our dedicated subforum for discussions of RHV and OLKVM hypervisors can be found here > oVirt KVM
Please post all oVirt KVM related questions and comments there and the responsible PM will answer.
I’ve been a VMware enthusiast for over 10 years with vSphere. So far, I’ve evaluated three alternatives:
-Hyper-V : I’m not entirely convinced, but it could work.
-XCP-ng/Xen Orchestra : At this point, it’s a strong alternative to maintain our SAN and BCP.
-Proxmox : We don't want to use Ceph, and other storage alternatives make the product less appealing.
The key issue is Veeam integration. It would be ideal to have Veeam support for XCP-ng.
Other solutions I’ve considered:
-Nutanix : Requires moving to a hyperconverged architecture, which is also expensive.
-Oracle : Not an option for us.
-RHV : Seems to be abandoned in favor of OpenShift, but it could offer a way out of VMware.
Thank you for your reply, I appreciate it. For my organization, vendor support is a key factor when choosing a hypervisor. We manage nearly 700 VMs, and some of our workload is used by customers. Given the scale and criticality, having reliable support is essential for us.
While I am aware Hyper-V has had its problems, as Gostev pointed out in a previous post on this thread, I would say all Hypervisors have their problems. I know VMWare certainly has and this entire thread only proves it.
However, I would encourage everyone to give Hyper-V a chance. The Hyper-V of Windows Server 2019/2022 and soon 2025 is not the same as the Windows Server 2008 Hyper-V many of you tried way back when.
@Gostev and I'm pretty sure that's not because the VMWare guys have that much faith in their hypervisor that they would forgo backups. Sounds like there is a mass migration in process.
OK I miscalculated by a few thousands but it doesn't change the picture, more or less the same number of installs... we're talking around 140K V12 backup servers for each hypervisor (this is from usage telemetry).
Well, for sure it's being actively evaluated with thousands of VMs already under protection. Too early to say though, need to see if people will stay with it after evaluation.
We are looking at AzureStack HCI, getting final proposals this week. We did think about Proxmox VE but there's not a lot of local support in Australia.
Double check the proposals... i wouldn't recommend the AzureStack HCI route, there are usecases for AzureStack HCI but you should be sure too really have them, like scripting/automating with AzureRessource Manager (json) for exaple...
you could build the exact same setup with S2D and Clustering, that AzureStack do without the monthly azure licesing and a little bit more freedom around hyper-v without having the strict boundaries of AzureStack HCI
Gostev wrote: ↑Sep 27, 2024 2:16 pm
OK I miscalculated by a few thousands but it doesn't change the picture, more or less the same number of installs... we're talking around 140K V12 backup servers for each hypervisor (this is from usage telemetry).
That's a quite a change I remember a post from you a year ago pointing out exactly the opposite (Hyper-V on decline for years), how the tables have turned... In some years the whole VMware debacle will be a hell of a case study
In my opinion VMware was technically the best hypervisor (management, security, stability and scalability).
Then Broadcom saw an opportunity to squeeze some money out of it and ruined the customerbase.
This will in the end cost VMware the leader position I believe, but Broadcom will be making money from it anyways and don't really care.
ITP-Stan wrote: ↑Sep 30, 2024 4:59 pm
In my opinion VMware was technically the best hypervisor (management, security, stability and scalability).
Then Broadcom saw an opportunity to squeeze some money out of it and ruined the customerbase.
This will in the end cost VMware the leader position I believe, but Broadcom will be making money from it anyways and don't really care.
They'll only be making money for this round until the next renewal as people are pushing ahead with plans to migrate, but it just wasn't possible in the initial time frame from the original announcement. Unless there's a very sudden about face (highly unlikely) then why would anyone stay if they have to pay so much more?
m.novelli wrote: ↑Oct 01, 2024 8:31 pm
Big customers like AT&T are the ones that Broadcom bet would never leave VMware due to migration complexity…
Wrong bet!
Marco
@Marco New contract negotiations. What we see and what's really going may not line up. IMO, AT&T doesn't have a leg to stand on anyway as from what I understand the takeover sets all existing contracts to nul thus the need to renegotiate.
The reality is, any org looking to move away from VMware only have one realistic option: Hyper-V. They're already paying for it.
The catch will be, and always is, admin/IT. Will they kick and scream and claw the ground resisting that change? If that's the case, AT&T has another tough choice to make.
Hi folks, the debate about "what can we do/use after vmware" probably won't quite soon, alternatives are on the market. But what I would like to have is a feature comparison between supported hypervisors from a veeam standpoint. For instance, is it possible to use CDP with Hyper-V and all that stuff. Yes, you can read the requirements of each module, but that takes some time and might be incomplete, having a simple matrix might answer all your questions in seconds, not hours...
Does it even exist and I was too blind to find it? Thanks!