Proxmox 3.4 now integrated with ZFS

[NeverDie]

I've been on the hunt for a hypervisor or hypervisor host that has an integrated ZFS, and it seems that Proxmox may be the first to do it: Proxmox VE 3.4 Released

It appears that home users can download and use Proxmox 3.4 for free.

Anyone here already using Proxmox with ZFS? If so, are there any gotcha's, or is it smooth sailing?

 

[RTM]

I wonder how they got around the licensing problems with Linux and ZFS.

 

[HellDiverUK]

I wonder how they got around the licensing problems with Linux and ZFS.

Probably ignored it.

 

[canta]

linux kernel is no tainted. ZoL(ZFS on linux) uses DKMS...
the big pain in the ass using DKMS:
Need to recompile DKMS when new kernel is installed. the DKMS update could fail on random situations, such as: system configuration, which need to update manually via command line .

 

[OBasel]

Probably ignored it.

I was thinking the same.

Has anyone tried this yet? Looks like they're on a more modern kernel too.

 

[canta]

I was thinking the same.

Has anyone tried this yet? Looks like they're on a more modern kernel too.

Not ignore it. Keyword: dkms

Zol is good overall in 0.6.3.x release.

I am using zol on three machines.

 

[PigLover]

I like ZoL. A lot. In its current release it's really quite good.

It's Proxmox that is in question. They have an inflexible 'quorum' model that makes sense for a limited set of HA applications - but they impose it on everything. Their networking model is right out of the 1990's, inseperably dependent on Linux bridges and ignoring modern approaches like vSwitches. And they are always behind on kernel revs because of their strange love of a deprecated tool for supporting containers.

To top it off the principles involved are arrogant and freely toss insults in response to honest questions in their forum.

They should be avoided...

 

[yaxisandxaxis]

I like ZoL. A lot. In its current release it's really quite good.

It's Proxmox that is in question. They have an inflexible 'quorum' model that makes sense for a limited set of HA applications - but they impose it on everything. Their networking model is right out of the 1990's, inseperably dependent on Linux bridges and ignoring modern approaches like vSwitches. And they are always behind on kernel revs because of their strange love of a deprecated tool for supporting containers.

To top it off the principles involved are arrogant and freely toss insults in response to honest questions in their forum.

They should be avoided...

Are you using a web tool for ZFS too or all CLI?

I'm with you on Proxmox @PigLover. Conceptually awesome. Flawed experience.

 

[PigLover]

I use command line. ZFS is simple enough to manage that you don't really need much of a GUI. And once you are in stable operation you don't really touch it all that often anyway.

That said, I do understand that @gea has a working port of his ZFS Web tools for ZoL. If you need/want a Web based manager his is quite good. And unlike the guys at Proxmix, @gea is a joy to work with when you have questions, issues, suggestions or otherwise.

 

[NeverDie]

I like ZoL. A lot. In its current release it's really quite good.

It's Proxmox that is in question. They have an inflexible 'quorum' model that makes sense for a limited set of HA applications - but they impose it on everything. Their networking model is right out of the 1990's, inseperably dependent on Linux bridges and ignoring modern approaches like vSwitches. And they are always behind on kernel revs because of their strange love of a deprecated tool for supporting containers.

To top it off the principles involved are arrogant and freely toss insults in response to honest questions in their forum.

They should be avoided...

Good to know. In that case, what's the best alternative that's equivalent (or better) than Proxmox? If there aren't any, then it becomes a challenge to pick the "least worse" choice. Depending on what the alternative is, maybe getting insulted and the other things are acceptable tradeoffs, at least for some people, until something better comes along.

 

[CreoleLakerFan]

I think $200 annually is a pittance for the functionality you get out of the VMUG Eval Experience.

 

[apnar]

I've started to play with ZoL on Centos 7. Been pretty smooth so far using command line for ZFS and KVM. Or you can use virt-manager if you want a little bit of a GUI around KVM.

 

[canta]

not related with proxmox,
ZoL is easy to maintance via command line ...
I always using ssh to control or troubleshoot ZoL.

I have been using Zol started with 0.6.2.X with CentOS 6.3-6.5, and 0.6.3.X with centos 7.X now.

totally agree, linux bridge is past technology, but robust!.
Virtual Switch is today technology .
I still remember to setup bridge on centos 5.X , a way back that time . urgh... getting old without realizing hah...

 

[canta]

Good to know. In that case, what's the best alternative that's equivalent (or better) than Proxmox? If there aren't any, then it becomes a challenge to pick the "least worse" choice. Depending on what the alternative is, maybe getting insulted and the other things are acceptable tradeoffs, at least for some people, until something better comes along.

you can do on linux distro....

but for easy and assuming that your are not doing funky configuration, proxmox should be adequate.
just a bit warning, free version is DIY. this is good to know linux deeply when dealing with.

I believe linux KVM is already mature that you use on any linux distro. one gimmick: is not 1,2, and 3 easy step to do.

swing would you? Main Page - KVM

 

[cperalt1]

A good alternative is Joyent's smartos along with Project FIFO as the web interface. Gives you ZFS on illumos kernel, Solaris containers, and KVM for virtualization along with Crossbow for networking. Best of all you can run from a PXE image or USB key so your disks are used for data and not the OS. While it takes a little getting used to, the community is very supportive.

Good to know. In that case, what's the best alternative that's equivalent (or better) than Proxmox? If there aren't any, then it becomes a challenge to pick the "least worse" choice. Depending on what the alternative is, maybe getting insulted and the other things are acceptable tradeoffs, at least for some people, until something better comes along.

good alternative

 

[PigLover]

Depending on what the alternative is, maybe getting insulted and the other things are acceptable tradeoffs, at least for some people, until something better comes along.

If your needs are simple - running a single host and simple networking - proxmox is not a bad choice. Once you add a second host and try to do clustering you'll crash head-on into the foibles of their "quorum" based shared database. And any kind of complex networking can be an adventure. Security is non-existent.

If your needs really are that simple, however, I'd probably recommend that you try Xen. At least with Xen simple clustering is not a cluster. And you can run ZFS on a VM client using PCIe pass-through.

 

[canta]

If your needs are simple - running a single host and simple networking - proxmox is not a bad choice. Once you add a second host and try to do clustering you'll crash head-on into the foibles of their "quorum" based shared database. And any kind of complex networking can be an adventure. Security is non-existent.

If your needs really are that simple, however, I'd probably recommend that you try Xen. At least with Xen simple clustering is not a cluster. And you can run ZFS on a VM client using PCIe pass-through.

some hate Xen..

I disagree that promox is not simple. yeah one host is a good choice on proxmox.
doing proxmox, you have to depend on yourself.

Honestly, I prefer proxmo for simple one host without funky configuration than Xen.
I would to refine: KVM . since proxmox use KVM

honestly, I do not trust zfs on a vm client via passthrough, this is easy to break down the whole system when you baremetal has issues. let alone running zfs on standalone machine and server many baremetals or clients/servers.

 

[yaxisandxaxis]

I'm inclined to try after the posting.

 

[T_Minus]

I still want to try Xen... lol back on track

 

[Biren78]

Too bad no docker too.