3 ms·
Those are problems, but they're problems with all container/jail based virtualization platforms like OpenVZ, FreeBSD jails, Solaris containers. The first quest
by cdjk 13y ago
Those are problems, but they're problems with all container/jail based virtualization platforms like OpenVZ, FreeBSD jails, Solaris containers.
The first question is a valid point. But you also get benefits from not having the overhead of N different kernels running. This is easiest to see when looking at VPS providers - a 512MB OpenVZ vps means you have 512MB of memory for your application to use. Yeah, kernel overhead isn't that much, especially if you're running a few high-resource instances, but it can help if you have lots of low memory instances. There's lots of discussion online about OpenVZ vs. xen/kvm vps hosts if you're curious.
As for patching - OpenVZ at least makes it very easy to do live migration of instances between servers (barring some weirdness if you have NFS mounts in the guest), although it appears that lxc (and therefore docker) can't do that [1]. In any event, it shouldn't hard to shutdown the guest, migrate, and restart the guest - especially if you're using shared storage of some sort.
As for your third point - backward compatibility with RHEL/Centos is generally quite good (since that's kind of the point of RHEL). At work we're currently on Centos 5, and our migration strategy to Centos 6 is probably going to be to install Centos 6 OpenVZ hosts, then move the guests and worry about upgrading the guests later. Forward-compatibility is an issue, but I don't think there's an easy solution to that.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system-level_virtualization http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system-level_virtuali...
- zobzu 13y agoKSM makes the overhead pretty low memory wise