Slashdot Mirror
OpenStack Ditches Microsoft Hyper-V
judgecorp writes "The OpenStack open source cloud project has removed Hyper-V from its infrastructure as a service (IaaS) framework, saying Microsoft's support for its hypervisor technology is 'broken.' This will embarass Microsoft, as major partners such as Dell and HP support OpenStack, along with service providers such as Internap." Adds reader alphadogg, this "means the code will be removed when the next version of OpenStack, called Essex, is released in the second quarter."
As I read the article, it says that OpenStep's support for Hyper-V is broken or incomplete, leading to its removal from of Hyper-V support from the OpenStep codebase. The summary here could be read either as Microsoft support for OpenStep is broken, or Microsoft support for its own Hyper-V product is broken, neither of which appears to be the case.
In other words, OpenStep users haven't adopted Hyper-V widely or spent a lot of time working on the OpenStep code, and so that part of the tree has fallen into disrepair and it's being removed as not having sufficient interest.
That's my guess...perhaps someone with more knowledge could clarify?
“Just as Nova enters feature freeze, it sounds like a good moment to consider removing deprecated, known-buggy-and-unmaintained or useless feature code from the Essex tree, “ he wrote.
In reply, Ken Pepple, director of cloud development at Internap Network Services, wrote: “”Hyper-V support is missing support for even the most basic functions – volumes, Glance, several network managers, etc. We investigated it for our service, but found it only borderline functional.”
Advice: on VPS providers
It's not hard to believe Hyper-V is broken
About 2 years ago, the Linux kernel devs threatened to kick the Hyper-V kernel driver out of mainline because of lack of maintenance
The original guys from MS who submitted the code just disappeared, not responding to emails or requests for code clean-up
Not sure what MS's game is with Hyper-V, but they don't seem that interested in making a decent hypervisor....
If you read the ML message (here : https://lists.launchpad.net/openstack/msg07065.html) you'll see all the reasons.
The hypervisor is fine, the Linux drivers have been cleaned up and the maintainer says everything is good now. Microsoft has made the same pledge to OpenStack, that they will work with them to clean up the code.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
Microsoft has been trying to push Hyper-V support into Linux, but their original driver code was complete shit, and it's just barely starting to get better. It's almost stable now, but not fully functional. So, yes it is fair to say that Hyper-V support is being removed from OpenStack because Microsoft's support for Hyper-V on Linux has been very poor.
After fighting with openstack on my hardware for months with no success, this will be the final straw that pushes me to a 100% Azure.stack.
Here is the key passage from the article, should you read it.
The "They" is Microsoft, and the guy saying it is person Microsoft has a liaison for the project.
Also, it is too hard to maintain code you don't have control over. Microsoft drafted someone else to develop the code, that organization was bought by Citrix who owns Zen Hyper-V, a competing project. Again mentioned in the article.
So, this is not just normal Microsoft Bashing by /. (well, it is) this is something that Microsoft deserves. Microsoft better start focusing on core competencies to support of Enterprise Infrastructure and Windows or it is going to find itself shrinking rapidly.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
As someone who has spent a great amount of time trying to manage a Hyper-V infrastructure, I can say this was a completely appropriate move and criticism of the product. The management and maintenance of Hyper-V is abysmal, in my experience.
Appended to the end of comments you post. The maximum is 120 characters.
The if you don't know, don't ASSUME that this is propaganda. The reality is that there's not enough contribution to have Hyper-v support up to shape for a release. Though it might work through libvirt. It's just that the hyper-v specific driver is getting away, not the full of hyper-v support. Also, it might well come back if someone cares. Openstack is really open in its development and governance, and contributions (even from Microsoft) are more than welcome!
It's easy to just ditch any Microsoft technology. But for once, Hyper-v isn't totally crap. It's a way better than ESXi, and comparable to Xen (in fact, they got their inspiration from working with Xen guys, and the architecture is the same as for Xen). The issue here, btw, wasn't hyper-v itself, just its support inside OpenStack.
It's easy to just ditch any Microsoft technology. But for once, Hyper-v isn't totally crap. It's a way better than ESXi, and comparable to Xen (in fact, they got their inspiration from working with Xen guys, and the architecture is the same as for Xen). The issue here, btw, wasn't hyper-v itself, just its support inside OpenStack.
i realize what the article was about, i was simply making an observation based on parent comment. however, saying hyper-v is better than esxi is a laughable statement at best. you've clearly been using different products than i have.
What are you smoking?
ESXi is miles above Xen at this point, and I'd rather use VirtualBox than Hyper-V. XenServer doesn't even enter the equation.
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
To the folks who said maybe the guys at CloudStack might think it is too hard to implement Hyper-V: WTF have you been smoking? These are the guys who built this from scratch, I doubt something would be "Too Hard" or that they were in some way too lazy to do it. To the folks who said Xen is not even in the picture: WTF have _YOU_ been smoking? Let's see...who uses Xen? RedHat, Oracle, Citrix, Microsoft (yep, they sure do!) and a host of other people from my measly little home box to MASSIVE hosting companies. My two centavos...
"My immediate reaction is "WTF? What kind of moron doesn't make things 64-bit safe to begin with?" Linus
HyperV has many more dependencies than other virtualization stuff.
For example,.if your host and management client are not in the same AD domain but you want to use MMC to remote manage a HyperV host (say you do not want to allow multiple people to remote desktop to the host), to configure the permissions and other stuff you often have to download and run an _unsupported_ tool: http://archive.msdn.microsoft.com/HVRemote
Or wade through 5 pages of stuff:
http://blogs.technet.com/b/jhoward/archive/2008/03/28/part-1-hyper-v-remote-management-you-do-not-have-the-requested-permission-to-complete-this-task-contact-the-administrator-of-the-authorization-policy-for-the-computer-computername.aspx
And even so, it often still doesn't work, e.g. the added firewall rules might not work for some stupid reason and you have to turn off the firewalls completely.
In contrast with VMware you need a lot few number of ports opened to do remote management, and you normally won't have problems getting remote management. In fact it's almost a "given" that you'd be mainly using remote management.
HyperV may also not work so well if you're not running Linux guests. Recently a colleague had a problem with a Linux guest- some (ICMP echo) frames/packets were being sent but not others (ARP replies)! I solved it by restarting the hyper-v virtual switch. Perhaps that HyperV server was not updated. Whatever it is, even vmware GSX server years ago caused me fewer problems than HyperV.
When asked if he's happy with Microsoft's contributions to Linux, he said "I am very happy with their contributions. The work that they have done on their drivers is amazing. The original driver submission was over 20 thousand lines long. Two new drivers have been added to the codebase, and lots of cleanup, making the final line count around 7 thousand lines. link
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
Oh, and as far as the pledge to fix the Openstack code here's my source. Next time do a bit of research before accusing someone of astroturfing just because the post happens to be pro-microsoft (if you bothered to check my posting history you'd see I'm no MS fanboy).
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
It's easy to just ditch any Microsoft technology. But for once, Hyper-v isn't totally crap. It's a way better than ESXi, and comparable to Xen (in fact, they got their inspiration from working with Xen guys, and the architecture is the same as for Xen). The issue here, btw, wasn't hyper-v itself, just its support inside OpenStack.
It's not that easy to ditch any MS technology - they built their company on tie-in, both for technical reasons and licensing reasons.
Their products work so well together that it's easy to get locked in. You start with MS-Office on Windows, then as your office grows you add a Windows Fileserver and AD server to manage the workstations and an Exchange server since it integrates well with Outlook and Outlook comes free with Office. Your accounting system runs on SQL/Server and you want to see more detailed reports so you add a reporting server. So many people want to see real-time reports so you add a Sharepoint server.
Now you've got a half dozen (or more) Window servers running your office. When it comes time to build your website, well you've already got Windows admins and developers, so .Net is the natural platform to use. You've committed yourself to buying so many CAL's for various products that new servers don't really cost much, certainly not enough to make it worthwhile to hire a Linux admin and start building on open source.
Oh, and hard-core WIndows developers/admins are just like hard-core Mac and Linux developers/admins - they love their platform and don't want to try anything else.
Citation? References?
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Or? Perhaps you are astroturfing.
I agree he should have provided a supporting link (someone else now have, supporting his claims), but can we please stop this crap with calling everybody with dissenting views and claims for astroturfers? What kind of paranoid world do people live in when they believe that everybody who post something they don't like has to be astroturfing. I have seen people with long posting histories of Linux and OSS support been called astroturfers for trying to have nuanced (or factual) comments that are not all "M$ Suxxor!" Not to mention the delusion of thinking Slashdot comments actually are worth any money or effort from major companies.
Accusations of astroturfing and schilling is the new Godwins law.
No, with Windows Server Enterprise you get licenses for four virtual instances of Server Standard or Server Enterprise on that same hardware. If you go with Datacenter Edition you gut unlimited virtualization rights and the ability to move VM's more than once every 90 days (or is it 30?). Almost every shop with a significant number of VM's is already licensing their hosts for Datacenter (I know we do and we run VMWare). As far as why you'd want native Openstack support, if you are going with a hybrid model where you have resources internally and externally it would allow you to have one tool chain control it all. Btw in a hybrid model you'd have to license any externally hosted VM's on a per machine basis which might make it significantly more expensive than internal resources using unlimited Datacenter rights though I expect those rights to be curtailed or the cost of datacenter licenses to go up significantly in the future since they've already gone that route with SQL Enterprise.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
As an hypervisor, Hyper-V isn't too bad. As for functionalities, I really don't know. Bug for ESXi, it's just a Linux domain starting instances just like KVM would, the model is flowed by concept. I would encourage you to read the "why Xen" pdf document written by one of the Xen contributors, and you'll see what I mean.
Not to mention the delusion of thinking Slashdot comments actually are worth any money or effort from major companies.
Exactly, I keep emailing Microsoft, Apple and Google volunteering my services as a paid shill, and they never reply.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it