From Proxmox to FreeBSD and Sylve in our office lab
iptechnics.com
From Proxmox to FreeBSD and Sylve in our office lab
1–10 of 86 posts
Re: From Proxmox to FreeBSD and Sylve in our office lab
#2Bhyve doesn't feature nested virt though.
Re: From Proxmox to FreeBSD and Sylve in our office lab
#3I love FreeBSD but Linux just provides every feature under the sun when it comes to virtualization. Do you find any missing features on bhyve ? Is bhyve reliable ? I can't imagine its been tested as thoroughly as KVM ...
Re: From Proxmox to FreeBSD and Sylve in our office lab
#4I love FreeBSD but Linux just provides every feature under the sun when it comes to virtualization. Do you find any missing features on bhyve ? Is bhyve reliable ? I can't imagine its been tested as thoroughly as KVM ...
Bhyve is quite cool but no nested virt which means you cannot nest vm_enter/exit calls with EPT pages so you cannot virtualize within those guests. I found this crucial. For instance Qubes OS won't run in Bhyve by any means.
Re: From Proxmox to FreeBSD and Sylve in our office lab
#5I love FreeBSD but Linux just provides every feature under the sun when it comes to virtualization. Do you find any missing features on bhyve ? Is bhyve reliable ? I can't imagine its been tested as thoroughly as KVM ...
Bhyve is quite cool but no nested virt which means you cannot nest vm_enter/exit calls with EPT pages so you cannot virtualize within those guests. I found this crucial. For instance Qubes OS won't run in Bhyve by any means.
Or Windows VBS, if you need to run full-featured Windows VMs.
Re: From Proxmox to FreeBSD and Sylve in our office lab
#6I love FreeBSD but Linux just provides every feature under the sun when it comes to virtualization. Do you find any missing features on bhyve ? Is bhyve reliable ? I can't imagine its been tested as thoroughly as KVM ...
Bhyve is quite cool but no nested virt which means you cannot nest vm_enter/exit calls with EPT pages so you cannot virtualize within those guests. I found this crucial. For instance Qubes OS won't run in Bhyve by any means.
Do they have any near-future plans to resolve that?
Re: From Proxmox to FreeBSD and Sylve in our office lab
#7What does Sylve provide that proxmox doesn't?
Or better, how does it do it better than proxmox?
This isn't to say that proxmox is the best thing since sliced bread, I'm curious as to what makes sylve better, is it the API?
Re: From Proxmox to FreeBSD and Sylve in our office lab
#8Sylve looks like a decent project with a promising future but this article really doesn't explain why they picked it over Proxmox at all. They explain a lot of things but I can't see the advantage over prox other than they wanted to use it.
Re: From Proxmox to FreeBSD and Sylve in our office lab
#9I love FreeBSD but Linux just provides every feature under the sun when it comes to virtualization. Do you find any missing features on bhyve ? Is bhyve reliable ? I can't imagine its been tested as thoroughly as KVM ...
If you are unsure of bhyve's abilities then why not test yourself? Speculation and guessing about stability or testing is useless without seeing if it works in your application.
Re: From Proxmox to FreeBSD and Sylve in our office lab
#10What does Sylve provide that proxmox doesn't? Or better, how does it do it better than proxmox? This isn't to say that proxmox is the best thing since sliced bread, I'm curious as to what makes sylve better, is it the API?
Without looking at the Sylve docs, I'll conjecture that it has deeper integration with ZFS. With a foundation on FreeBSD, there is a likelihood Sylve can support ZFS-on-root rollbacks better than hacking it into Proxmox. A rollback capability is why I'm looking for Proxmox alternatives. In the Linux world, Talos Linux and IncusOS provide A/B updates which achieve a similar rollback capability. With something based on FreeBSD, your "immutable" OS and all of it's data can be treated equally as ZFS datasets. There's also a higher risk that a Linux kernel update will break ZFS.