61–70 of 177 posts
Isn’t it simply Oxide founders are old Sun engineers, and Illumos is the open source spinoff of their old work.
Practically speaking, its hard to do it completely objectively and the in-house expertise probably colored the decision.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought AWS uses KVM, which is the same VM that QEMU would use? Or am I mistaken?
AWS uses KVM in the kernel but they have a different, non-open source userspace stack for EC2; plus Firecracker which is open source but is only used for Lambda, and runs on EC2 bare metal instances. Google also uses KVM with a variety of userspace stacks: a proprietary one (tied to a lot of internal Google infrastructure but overall a lot more similar to QEMU than Amazon's) for GCE, gVisor for AppEngine or whatever…
Illumos makes sense as a host OS—it’s capable, they know it, they can make sure it works well on their hardware, and virtualization means users don’t need that much familiarity with it. If I were Oxide, though, I’d be sprinting to seamless VMWare support. Broadcom has turned into a modern-day Oracle (but dumber??) and many customers will migrate in the next two years. Even if those legacy VMs aren’t “hyperscale”, the…
Broadcom also isn't all that dumb, VMware was fat and lazy and customers were coddled for a very long time. They've made a bet that it's sticky. The competition isn't as weak as they thought, that's true, but it will take 5+ years to catch up, not 2 years, in general. Broadcom was betting on it taking 10 years: plenty of time to squeeze out margins. Customers have been trying and failing to eliminate the vTax since OpenStack. Red Hat and Microsoft are the main viable alternatives.
That's with virtio, the virtual intel "card" is even slower.
They went with Illumos though, so curious if the poor performance is a FreeBSD-specific thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AWS uses KVM in the kernel but they have a different, non-open source userspace stack for EC2; plus Firecracker which is open source but is only used for Lambda, and runs on EC2 bare metal instances. Google also uses KVM with a variety of userspace stacks: a proprietary one (tied to a lot of internal Google infrastructure but overall a lot more similar to QEMU than Amazon's) for GCE, gVisor for AppEngine or whatever…
Lambda and Fargate.
Been running Bhyve on FreeBSD (technically FreeNAS). Found PCIe pass-through of NMVe drives was fairly straight forward once the correct incantations were found, but network speed to host has been fairly abysmal. On my admittedly aging Threadripper 1920X, I can only get ~2-3 Gbps peak from a Linux guest. That's with virtio, the virtual intel "card" is even slower. They went with Illumos though, so curious if the poor…
> Xen: Large and complicated (by dom0) codebase, discarded for KVM by AMZN 1. Xen Type-1 hypervisor is smaller than KVM/QEMU. 2. Xen "dom0" = Linux/FreeBSD/OpenSolaris. KVM/bhyve also need host OS. 3. AMZN KVM-subset: x86 cpu/mem virt, blk/net via Arm Nitro hardware. 4. bhyve is Type-2. 5. Xen has Type-2 (uXen). 6. Xen dom0/host can be disaggregated (Hyperlaunch), unlike KVM. 7. pKVM (Arm/Android) is smaller than KVM…
Talking about "technological and political issues" without mentioning any, or without mentioning which components would need to be revived, sounds a lot like FUD unfortunately. Mixing and matching traditional and systemd components is super common, for example Fedora and RHEL use chrony instead of timesyncd, and NetworkManager instead of networkd.
Unrelated, but is this a homegrown publishing platform?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AWS uses KVM in the kernel but they have a different, non-open source userspace stack for EC2; plus Firecracker which is open source but is only used for Lambda, and runs on EC2 bare metal instances. Google also uses KVM with a variety of userspace stacks: a proprietary one (tied to a lot of internal Google infrastructure but overall a lot more similar to QEMU than Amazon's) for GCE, gVisor for AppEngine or whatever…
Lambda and Fargate.