Open Stack

I get what you are saying.  That makes sense.

On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Fox, Kevin M <Kevin.Fox at pnnl.gov> wrote:

>  I don't believe they do, but its not about that. its about capacity. To
> get the most out of your really expensive hyperv datacenter license, you
> should load it up with as many windows vm's as you can. A physical machine
> can only handle a fixed number of vm's max. If you put a linux vm on it,
> thats one less windows vm you can launch there, meaning you have to buy
> more datacenter physical nodes/licenses, which adds cost.
>
> While I havent explored this option, it might be possible to buy
> datacenter hyperv licenses for your windows vm's, and put them in one host
> aggrigate, and buy cheaper windows licenses for hyperv for free os's and
> put them in another, and run things that way. Though you will still be
> paying more for windows licenses then if you did kvm for the free os's.
>
> Thanks,
> Kevin
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* matt [matt at nycresistor.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 19, 2015 9:36 AM
> *To:* Fox, Kevin M
> *Cc:* maishsk+openstack at maishsk.com;
> openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Openstack-operators] Hypervisor decision
>
>   I was under the impression hyper-v didn't charge a per seat license on
> non windows instances?
>
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Fox, Kevin M <Kevin.Fox at pnnl.gov> wrote:
>
>>  So, in the pets vs cattle cloud philosophy, you want to be able to have
>> as many cattle as you need, rather then limit the sets to a smaller number
>> of more pet like things.
>>
>> kvm allows unlimited numbers of vm's, which is very cloudy. but due to
>> Windows licensing, tends to only work well with linux/bsd VM's.
>>
>> Windows is a whole nother kettle of fish. They either license it per vm,
>> which is very pet like, or alternately, the more cattle friendly way is to
>> buy a DataCenter* version of windows.
>>
>> Each hypervisor needs to be the DataCenter version, but it allows you to
>> run unlimited Windows VM's on that hypervisor. So if you want to run lots
>> of windows cattle, its can be the way to go.
>>
>> Due to its high cost, it does not usually make sense to run all your
>> linux vm's on Windows DataCenter version, so you run both kvm for linux/bsd
>> vm's and Windows DataCenter licensed hyperv for windows vm's.
>>
>> * http://www.microsoft.com/licensing/about-licensing/virtualization.aspx
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Kevin
>>  ------------------------------
>> *From:* Maish Saidel-Keesing [maishsk at maishsk.com]
>> *Sent:* Thursday, March 19, 2015 12:19 AM
>> *To:* openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [Openstack-operators] Hypervisor decision
>>
>>   That is interesting Tim.
>>
>> Why Hyper-V if I may ask? Why not stick just with KVM?
>>
>> Maish
>>
>> On 19/03/15 08:22, Tim Bell wrote:
>>
>>  At CERN, we run KVM and Hyper-V. Both work fine.
>>
>>
>>
>> Depending on the size of your cluster, you may have other factors to
>> consider such as monitoring and configuration management. We use Puppet to
>> configure both environnments.
>>
>>
>>
>> Images are tagged with a property hypervisor_type which is used to
>> schedule workloads to the appropriate hypervisor.
>>
>>
>>
>> Tim
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* matt [mailto:matt at nycresistor.com <matt at nycresistor.com>]
>> *Sent:* 18 March 2015 23:24
>> *To:* Abel Lopez
>> *Cc:* openstack-operators at lists.openstack.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [Openstack-operators] Hypervisor decision
>>
>>
>>
>> most openstack environments at kvm, so if you want to stick with the
>> herd, that's the way to go.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 5:53 PM, Abel Lopez <alopgeek at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Interesting topic, since you're already running Hyper-v and ESX, I'm
>> inferring that your workload is heavy on windows VMs.
>> If you're doing majority windows, and minority linux, stick with hyper-v.
>> The benchmarks I've read show that windows VMs run fastest on hyper-v VS
>> all others.
>> If you expect an even split, it might make sense to create Host
>> Aggregates of various hypervisiors like hyper-v and KVM, and utilize
>> extra-specs in the flavors and guest images to aid in scheduling, for
>> example "Windows images launch on the hyper-v pool"
>>
>>
>> > On Mar 18, 2015, at 2:41 PM, Vytenis Silgalis <vsilgalis at outlook.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > I'm looking to champion openstack at my company, we currently run both
>> a small hyper-v cluster and 3 VMware clusters.   However we are not married
>> to any specific hypervisor.  What I'm looking for is recommendations for
>> which hypervisor we should look at for our openstack environments and the
>> pros/con's people have run into with the various hypervisors supported by
>> openstack.
>> >
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Vytenis
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > OpenStack-operators mailing list
>> > OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
>> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-operators mailing list
>> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-operators mailing listOpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.orghttp://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards, Maish Saidel-Keesing
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-operators mailing list
>> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20150319/e6416010/attachment.html>