----- "Pasi K?rkk?inen" <pasik at iki.fi> wrote:> On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 09:04:20AM -0500, Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu wrote: > > Why would one use ConVirt instead of the management tools included in > > RHEL and/or CentOS? What's the difference? > > RHEL/CentOS doesn't provide web-based management.. or even easy > multi-host / cluster management of virtualization nodes. > > -- PasiAre there any *good* reasons? (Since I really hate commercials, I feel compelled to present my contrarian viewpoint.) ConVirt addresses a pretty small portion of the virtualization landscape, and it consists of only a few significant parts: 1. Do what other free and open tools already do. 2. Slap a web interface on it! 3. Spam lists. 4. Rope in suckers. The suggestion that a web interface is a value add to an infrastructure issue is at least insulting. You could attempt to slap a web interface on a fuel injection system (or maybe at least give access to the magic a la MegaSquirt), but a bunch of assholes are still going to blow something up. It's not going to give any admin worth his or her salt a boner because it's not readily scriptable and it amounts to candy for retards. Secondly, everything else that it does is already there. If you can't do it, you shouldn't be touching the machines. The tool may or may not address some vanilla installations (if there ever was one), but if you need something like that, you are probably better off with EC2 or at least letting someone else handle it. -- Christopher G. Stach II http://ldsys.net/~cgs/
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 12:54 AM, Christopher G. Stach II <cgs at ldsys.net>wrote:> ----- "Pasi K?rkk?inen" <pasik at iki.fi> wrote: > > > > RHEL/CentOS doesn't provide web-based management.. or even easy > > multi-host / cluster management of virtualization nodes. > > > > -- Pasi > > Are there any *good* reasons? (Since I really hate commercials, I feel > compelled to present my contrarian viewpoint.) ConVirt addresses a pretty > small portion of the virtualization landscape, and it consists of only a few > significant parts: > > 1. Do what other free and open tools already do. > 2. Slap a web interface on it! > 3. Spam lists. > 4. Rope in suckers. > > The suggestion that a web interface is a value add to an infrastructure > issue is at least insulting. You could attempt to slap a web interface on a > fuel injection system (or maybe at least give access to the magic a la > MegaSquirt), but a bunch of assholes are still going to blow something up. > It's not going to give any admin worth his or her salt a boner because it's > not readily scriptable and it amounts to candy for retards. Secondly, > everything else that it does is already there. If you can't do it, you > shouldn't be touching the machines. > > The tool may or may not address some vanilla installations (if there ever > was one), but if you need something like that, you are probably better off > with EC2 or at least letting someone else handle it. > > -- > Christopher G. Stach II > http://ldsys.net/~cgs/ <http://ldsys.net/%7Ecgs/> >As these tools become more mature I'd like to see some comparisons because I too get a little tired of all the hype surrounding 20 tools that do exactly the same thing. I played with Convirt quite a while ago but it either didn't install right or didn't work right. Version 2.0 looks better. But then we have Eucalyptus, Enomalism, Convirt, Orchestra, Xen Admin, DTC-Xen, Cloudmin and I'd guess a whole bunch more. I wrote my own for classroom purposes that reads a roster and lets me act on whole classes of machines. I didn't release it because I think we have enough Xen guis. What we need to do is combine resources and make one real GOOD one. Grant McWilliams -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-virt/attachments/20100307/6d8fd590/attachment-0006.html>
On Sun, Mar 07, 2010 at 02:54:53AM -0600, Christopher G. Stach II wrote:> ----- "Pasi K?rkk?inen" <pasik at iki.fi> wrote: > > > On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 09:04:20AM -0500, Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu wrote: > > > Why would one use ConVirt instead of the management tools included in > > > RHEL and/or CentOS? What's the difference? > > > > RHEL/CentOS doesn't provide web-based management.. or even easy > > multi-host / cluster management of virtualization nodes. > > > > -- Pasi > > Are there any *good* reasons? (Since I really hate commercials, I feel compelled to present my contrarian viewpoint.) ConVirt addresses a pretty small portion of the virtualization landscape, and it consists of only a few significant parts: > > 1. Do what other free and open tools already do. > 2. Slap a web interface on it! > 3. Spam lists. > 4. Rope in suckers. > > The suggestion that a web interface is a value add to an infrastructure issue is at least insulting. You could attempt to slap a web interface on a fuel injection system (or maybe at least give access to the magic a la MegaSquirt), but a bunch of assholes are still going to blow something up. It's not going to give any admin worth his or her salt a boner because it's not readily scriptable and it amounts to candy for retards. Secondly, everything else that it does is already there. If you can't do it, you shouldn't be touching the machines. > > The tool may or may not address some vanilla installations (if there ever was one), but if you need something like that, you are probably better off with EC2 or at least letting someone else handle it. >You have some good points here. An user API is absolutely a requirement for system like this, to let the powerusers/admins script things and create custom management scripts. Web interface frontend should/could be using the same API! -- Pasi
Thanks for sharing your view points. You are right, If some one wants to make a mess.. they can do it as easily with Web interface as with command line tools. As far as *good* reasons why you may want to consider ConVirt 2.0 for your needs, please see the following url, http://convirture.com/products_opensource.html Feel free to compare it with other open source tools and give suggestions on what you would like to see. Just a side note, one announcement per release is hardly be categorized under "spamming" or "commercials". --- On Sun, 3/7/10, Christopher G. Stach II <cgs at ldsys.net> wrote:> From: Christopher G. Stach II <cgs at ldsys.net> > Subject: Re: [CentOS-virt] Introducing ConVirt 2.0 > To: "Discussion about the virtualization on CentOS" <centos-virt at centos.org> > Date: Sunday, March 7, 2010, 12:54 AM > ----- "Pasi K?rkk?inen" <pasik at iki.fi> > wrote: > > > On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 09:04:20AM -0500, Kanwar > Ranbir Sandhu wrote: > > > Why would one use ConVirt instead of the > management tools included in > > > RHEL and/or CentOS?? What's the difference? > > > > RHEL/CentOS doesn't provide web-based management.. or > even easy > > multi-host / cluster management of virtualization > nodes. > > > > -- Pasi > > Are there any *good* reasons? (Since I really hate > commercials, I feel compelled to present my contrarian > viewpoint.) ConVirt addresses a pretty small portion of the > virtualization landscape, and it consists of only a few > significant parts: > > 1. Do what other free and open tools already do. > 2. Slap a web interface on it! > 3. Spam lists. > 4. Rope in suckers. > > The suggestion that a web interface is a value add to an > infrastructure issue is at least insulting. You could > attempt to slap a web interface on a fuel injection system > (or maybe at least give access to the magic a la > MegaSquirt), but a bunch of assholes are still going to blow > something up. It's not going to give any admin worth his or > her salt a boner because it's not readily scriptable and it > amounts to candy for retards. Secondly, everything else that > it does is already there. If you can't do it, you shouldn't > be touching the machines. > > The tool may or may not address some vanilla installations > (if there ever was one), but if you need something like > that, you are probably better off with EC2 or at least > letting someone else handle it. > > -- > Christopher G. Stach II > http://ldsys.net/~cgs/ > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-virt mailing list > CentOS-virt at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-virt >
On 03/09/2010 08:28 PM, jd wrote:> Just a side note, one announcement per release is hardly be categorized under "spamming" or "commercials". >Dont do it on this list, there are better places - like freshmeat.net - KB