7 ms·

KVM and Proxmox also run very well on that platform, if you're more used to those stacks (and the management tools are free).

stock_toaster 7y ago
Some additional options: * XCP-ng (based on xenserver) * FreeBSD bhyve.
algo_trader 7y ago
Can u run proxmox on a single developer machine ? (so that you boot up your machine into one of the virtualized OSes)
- dsl 7y ago
  No, you'd want something more like unRAID for that.
- j45 7y ago
  Proxmox boots to a shell as far as I have seen. The interface is all web-based. Also have seen some folks who have used a Pi or a Chromebit to remote into any machine they choose.
- tyingq 7y ago
  That's almost it's strong point. It's pretty quirky from the outside, but I like Proxmox. You can see, pretty quickly, with a ~$50/month experiment on OVH's discount arm (SoYouStart.com) if it's a good fit. You can mix and match normal VMs with LXD containers, and it does quite well for single physical hosts or small clusters. Past some scale, I'd go with something else, but it's great at the < 20 physical host range. It's a fairly unsung open source area. OpenVZ used to be a semi for-profit, open source/ but we want money, competitor here. Guessing they are mostly dead now. (Not celebrating that...they did a lot of good).
- jlgaddis 7y ago
  > Can u run proxmox on a single developer machine ? Yes. Proxmox is built on Debian (or was, last I played with it) and you can actually install it on a Debian host, if desired. > (so that you boot up your machine into one of the virtualized OSes) No.
  - moondev 7y ago
    gpu + usb passthrough and autostart the vm on boot
- fomine3 7y ago
  The good thing about Proxmox is the flexibility because of It's Debian-based. I can do anything than can do on Debian like custom monitoring, manager filesystem, etc.
anonymouswacker 7y ago
I'm looking for a hypervisor recommendation... I am hoping to virtualize at least two if not all three of my machines: Unraid (pass-thru HDDs); pfSense (pass-thru NIC); and Windows 10 (pass-thru Graphics). I am hoping to have Windows 10 running fast enough to do some light photo editing. Which hypervisor would you think to try first?
- mastax 7y ago
  Have you ruled out unraid? It has built-in VM management and supports pass-through.
  - anonymouswacker 7y ago
    The only issue is I didn't want to lose my pfSense connection when Unraid reboots for upgrades.
    - sjwright 7y ago
      I have the same impulse to want to virtualise my router. I’ve repeatedly agonised over this but keep coming back to the decision that as cool as it would be, so long as internet uptime matters, the router probably needs to be separate hardware. You can get good, power efficient pfsense hardware for around $200 USD. A few bonus notes: —You could spend a little bit more and get hardware that's good enough to add a virtualisation layer to your dedicated router. —If your uplink is less than 300 megabit, and you have a managed switch with VLANs, your pfsense box doesn't need to be dual NIC. This could open the door for cheaper or re-purposed hardware.
      - koyote 7y ago
        I have had pfSense running on Proxmox for several months now. Upgraded to the latest pfSense version a couple of days ago and the total downtime was in the order of minutes. It's a bit too early to say whether it's a good idea or not; the main concern I have is that you have two points of failure instead of only one. Other than that worry it has been very smooth.
LeoPanthera 7y ago
I've always preferred Proxmox because of its container support. I have a number of Proxmox hosts that don't have any VMs on them at all, just containers.
Scarbutt 7y ago
One thing I really like about ESXi the last time I used it was the built-in virtual switch, other solutions in KVM world where not up to par. Maybe it's different today.
- lostlogin 7y ago
  I’m very much a lightweight and I found that ESXi was great when combined with Fusion on a Mac. Being able to build VMs locally then upload them is nice. Maybe other platforms have methods like this too?
  - jlgaddis 7y ago
    VMware Workstation runs on Windows and Linux and supports the same "Connect to ESXi" functionality that Fusion does on macOS.
    - lostlogin 7y ago
      Thank you.
henvic 7y ago
I was almost sold to bhyve as I intended to have FreeBSD on this machine, but at the last minute I decided to give ESXi a try first.
- gonzo 7y ago
  bhyve is cool, but ESXi has some good tools.
- stock_toaster 7y ago
  If you decide to give bhyve a whirl at some point, I highly recommend giving vm-bhyve[1] a try for managing the VMs. Makes lots of tasks much easier. [1]: https://github.com/churchers/vm-bhyve https://github.com/churchers/vm-bhyve
znpy 7y ago
I've always disliked the fact that proxmox is basically uncapable of hosting virtual machine images to spawn vms at will. You have to fiddle with template images but it's kind of a tedious task.

stock_toaster 7y ago

Some additional options: * XCP-ng (based on xenserver) * FreeBSD bhyve.

algo_trader 7y ago

Can u run proxmox on a single developer machine ? (so that you boot up your machine into one of the virtualized OSes)

dsl 7y ago
No, you'd want something more like unRAID for that.
j45 7y ago
Proxmox boots to a shell as far as I have seen. The interface is all web-based. Also have seen some folks who have used a Pi or a Chromebit to remote into any machine they choose.
tyingq 7y ago
That's almost it's strong point. It's pretty quirky from the outside, but I like Proxmox. You can see, pretty quickly, with a ~$50/month experiment on OVH's discount arm (SoYouStart.com) if it's a good fit. You can mix and match normal VMs with LXD containers, and it does quite well for single physical hosts or small clusters. Past some scale, I'd go with something else, but it's great at the < 20 physical host range. It's a fairly unsung open source area. OpenVZ used to be a semi for-profit, open source/ but we want money, competitor here. Guessing they are mostly dead now. (Not celebrating that...they did a lot of good).
jlgaddis 7y ago
> Can u run proxmox on a single developer machine ? Yes. Proxmox is built on Debian (or was, last I played with it) and you can actually install it on a Debian host, if desired. > (so that you boot up your machine into one of the virtualized OSes) No.
- moondev 7y ago
  gpu + usb passthrough and autostart the vm on boot
fomine3 7y ago
The good thing about Proxmox is the flexibility because of It's Debian-based. I can do anything than can do on Debian like custom monitoring, manager filesystem, etc.

anonymouswacker 7y ago

I'm looking for a hypervisor recommendation... I am hoping to virtualize at least two if not all three of my machines: Unraid (pass-thru HDDs); pfSense (pass-thru NIC); and Windows 10 (pass-thru Graphics). I am hoping to have Windows 10 running fast enough to do some light photo editing. Which hypervisor would you think to try first?

mastax 7y ago
Have you ruled out unraid? It has built-in VM management and supports pass-through.
- anonymouswacker 7y ago
  The only issue is I didn't want to lose my pfSense connection when Unraid reboots for upgrades.
  - sjwright 7y ago
    I have the same impulse to want to virtualise my router. I’ve repeatedly agonised over this but keep coming back to the decision that as cool as it would be, so long as internet uptime matters, the router probably needs to be separate hardware. You can get good, power efficient pfsense hardware for around $200 USD. A few bonus notes: —You could spend a little bit more and get hardware that's good enough to add a virtualisation layer to your dedicated router. —If your uplink is less than 300 megabit, and you have a managed switch with VLANs, your pfsense box doesn't need to be dual NIC. This could open the door for cheaper or re-purposed hardware.
    - koyote 7y ago
      I have had pfSense running on Proxmox for several months now. Upgraded to the latest pfSense version a couple of days ago and the total downtime was in the order of minutes. It's a bit too early to say whether it's a good idea or not; the main concern I have is that you have two points of failure instead of only one. Other than that worry it has been very smooth.

LeoPanthera 7y ago

I've always preferred Proxmox because of its container support. I have a number of Proxmox hosts that don't have any VMs on them at all, just containers.

Scarbutt 7y ago

One thing I really like about ESXi the last time I used it was the built-in virtual switch, other solutions in KVM world where not up to par. Maybe it's different today.

lostlogin 7y ago
I’m very much a lightweight and I found that ESXi was great when combined with Fusion on a Mac. Being able to build VMs locally then upload them is nice. Maybe other platforms have methods like this too?
- jlgaddis 7y ago
  VMware Workstation runs on Windows and Linux and supports the same "Connect to ESXi" functionality that Fusion does on macOS.
  - lostlogin 7y ago
    Thank you.

henvic 7y ago

I was almost sold to bhyve as I intended to have FreeBSD on this machine, but at the last minute I decided to give ESXi a try first.

gonzo 7y ago
bhyve is cool, but ESXi has some good tools.
stock_toaster 7y ago
If you decide to give bhyve a whirl at some point, I highly recommend giving vm-bhyve[1] a try for managing the VMs. Makes lots of tasks much easier. [1]: https://github.com/churchers/vm-bhyve https://github.com/churchers/vm-bhyve

znpy 7y ago

I've always disliked the fact that proxmox is basically uncapable of hosting virtual machine images to spawn vms at will. You have to fiddle with template images but it's kind of a tedious task.