Containers vs. OpenVZ

Containers vs. OpenVZ

[Enrico Weigelt]

Hi folks,


could anyone please point out the difference main difference 
between linux-containers and openvz ? It is possible to replace
ovz by linux-containers yet ?


thx
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/

 phone:  +49 36207 519931  email: weigelt-EU+a56NjgY8@public.gmane.org
 mobile: +49 151 27565287  icq:   210169427         skype: nekrad666
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Embedded-Linux / Portierung / Opensource-QM / Verteilte Systeme
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Containers vs. OpenVZ

[Matt Helsley]

On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 12:33:40PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> 
> Hi folks,
> 
> 
> could anyone please point out the difference main difference 
> between linux-containers and openvz ? It is possible to replace
> ovz by linux-containers yet ?
> 
> thx

Hi,

	At the very least there is no kernel code in mainline for
checkpoint/restart of containers at this time. We're still working on
patches for that feature. So that's one major difference between
"linux-containers" and openvz.

	I'm sure there are other differences which openvz and lxc folks
can point out but this is the one I'm presently most-keenly aware of. I
haven't had time to follow what's new with openvz so I'll leave the
rest of the comparison to other folks.

Cheers,
	-Matt Helsley

Re: Containers vs. OpenVZ

[Whit Blauvelt]

As someone who's not running either, but was sampling both about a month
back, my experience was (1) the current and next-to-latest openvz patches
produced kernels which couldn't really run openvz - it crashed - and it took
a couple of weeks to get a response to my bug report on that, while (2) lxc
has a very responsive development team, when I hit bugs there too, but it's
maybe 6 months out of being mature enough to really pay off for a sysadmin
of mid-level skills like me. If you're an ace, I'm sure you can get good use
now.

For what little my short-acquaintance comparison's worth, the openvz bugs
I hit were a lot more serious. It's doubtless presently more
feature-complete, when it works. But there's a lot more momentum in lxc,
plus it's mainline in the kernel so it's future's brighter.

Meanwhile I've settled on kvm, but can see some real uses for lxc in the
not-far future.

Whit

Re: Containers vs. OpenVZ

[Oren Laadan]

On 08/17/2010 08:24 PM, Matt Helsley wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 12:33:40PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
>>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>>
>> could anyone please point out the difference main difference
>> between linux-containers and openvz ? It is possible to replace
>> ovz by linux-containers yet ?
>>
>> thx
>
> Hi,
>
> 	At the very least there is no kernel code in mainline for
> checkpoint/restart of containers at this time. We're still working on
> patches for that feature. So that's one major difference between
> "linux-containers" and openvz.

To be fair, there is not kernel code in mainline for openvz either...

Oren.

>
> 	I'm sure there are other differences which openvz and lxc folks
> can point out but this is the one I'm presently most-keenly aware of. I
> haven't had time to follow what's new with openvz so I'll leave the
> rest of the comparison to other folks.
>
> Cheers,
> 	-Matt Helsley
> _______________________________________________
> Containers mailing list
> Containers-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org
> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
>

Re: Containers vs. OpenVZ

[Marc Aymerich]

On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 2:59 AM, Oren Laadan <orenl-eQaUEPhvms7ENvBUuze7eA@public.gmane.org> wrote:

>
>
> On 08/17/2010 08:24 PM, Matt Helsley wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 12:33:40PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi folks,
> >>
> >>
> >> could anyone please point out the difference main difference
> >> between linux-containers and openvz ? It is possible to replace
> >> ovz by linux-containers yet ?
> >>
> >> thx
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >       At the very least there is no kernel code in mainline for
> > checkpoint/restart of containers at this time. We're still working on
> > patches for that feature. So that's one major difference between
> > "linux-containers" and openvz.
>
> To be fair, there is not kernel code in mainline for openvz either...



really? http://wiki.openvz.org/File:Kernel_patches_stats.png

-- 
Marc

Re: Containers vs. OpenVZ

[Marc Aymerich]

On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 12:42 PM, Marc Aymerich <glicerinu-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 2:59 AM, Oren Laadan <orenl-eQaUEPhvms7ENvBUuze7eA@public.gmane.org>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 08/17/2010 08:24 PM, Matt Helsley wrote:
>> > On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 12:33:40PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi folks,
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> could anyone please point out the difference main difference
>> >> between linux-containers and openvz ? It is possible to replace
>> >> ovz by linux-containers yet ?
>> >>
>> >> thx
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> >       At the very least there is no kernel code in mainline for
>> > checkpoint/restart of containers at this time. We're still working on
>> > patches for that feature. So that's one major difference between
>> > "linux-containers" and openvz.
>>
>> To be fair, there is not kernel code in mainline for openvz either...
>
>
>
> really? http://wiki.openvz.org/File:Kernel_patches_stats.png
>

sorry Oren I misunderstand your mail. It's true, there is no c/r on mainline
for openvz too.



-- 
Marc

Re: Containers vs. OpenVZ

[Oren Laadan]

On 08/18/2010 06:48 AM, Marc Aymerich wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 12:42 PM, Marc Aymerich<glicerinu-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 2:59 AM, Oren Laadan<orenl-eQaUEPhvms7ENvBUuze7eA@public.gmane.org>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 08/17/2010 08:24 PM, Matt Helsley wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 12:33:40PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> could anyone please point out the difference main difference
>>>>> between linux-containers and openvz ? It is possible to replace
>>>>> ovz by linux-containers yet ?
>>>>>
>>>>> thx
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>>        At the very least there is no kernel code in mainline for
>>>> checkpoint/restart of containers at this time. We're still working on
>>>> patches for that feature. So that's one major difference between
>>>> "linux-containers" and openvz.
>>>
>>> To be fair, there is not kernel code in mainline for openvz either...
>>
>>
>>
>> really? http://wiki.openvz.org/File:Kernel_patches_stats.png
>>
>
> sorry Oren I misunderstand your mail. It's true, there is no c/r on mainline
> for openvz too.

No problem, my language was not entirely unambiguous. To be precise,
while openvz is a great project and contribute{s,d} a lot to the
kernel, the openvz kernel - with or without c/r - is not in mainline.

Oren.

Re: Containers vs. OpenVZ

[Matt Helsley]

On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 12:42:48PM +0200, Marc Aymerich wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 2:59 AM, Oren Laadan <orenl-eQaUEPhvms7ENvBUuze7eA@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > On 08/17/2010 08:24 PM, Matt Helsley wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 12:33:40PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi folks,
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> could anyone please point out the difference main difference
> > >> between linux-containers and openvz ? It is possible to replace
> > >> ovz by linux-containers yet ?
> > >>
> > >> thx
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >       At the very least there is no kernel code in mainline for
> > > checkpoint/restart of containers at this time. We're still working on
> > > patches for that feature. So that's one major difference between
> > > "linux-containers" and openvz.
> >
> > To be fair, there is not kernel code in mainline for openvz either...
> 
> 
> 
> really? http://wiki.openvz.org/File:Kernel_patches_stats.png

Marc,

	We are quite aware of and appreciate openvz's many kernel
contributions. Please consider the context of Oren's reply above. I was
talking about checkpoint/restart not being in the mainline kernel. I
am not aware of any openvz checkpoint/restart code in the mainline
kernel. [ Cc'ing Pavel so he can correct me if I am wrong. ]

Cheers,
	-Matt Helsley

Re: Containers vs. OpenVZ

[Pavel Emelyanov]

> Marc,
> 
> 	We are quite aware of and appreciate openvz's many kernel
> contributions. Please consider the context of Oren's reply above. I was
> talking about checkpoint/restart not being in the mainline kernel. I
> am not aware of any openvz checkpoint/restart code in the mainline
> kernel. [ Cc'ing Pavel so he can correct me if I am wrong. ]

No we don't have any our cpt/rst code in the mainline unfortunately :(
And no - you cannot replace openvz with lxc yet for many reasons.

> Cheers,
> 	-Matt Helsley
> 

Re: [Devel] Re: Containers vs. OpenVZ

[Peter Volkov]

В Пнд, 23/08/2010 в 11:44 +0400, Pavel Emelyanov пишет:
> And no - you cannot replace openvz with lxc yet for many reasons.

Pavel, I think lot's of people will benefit if you summarize important
points of differences. Yea, I have my own list but I'd better listen to
knowledgeable people first ;)


With best regards,
-- 
Peter.

_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers

Re: [Devel] Re: Containers vs. OpenVZ

[Pavel Emelyanov]

On 08/23/2010 01:08 PM, Peter Volkov wrote:
> В Пнд, 23/08/2010 в 11:44 +0400, Pavel Emelyanov пишет:
>> And no - you cannot replace openvz with lxc yet for many reasons.
> 
> Pavel, I think lot's of people will benefit if you summarize important
> points of differences. Yea, I have my own list but I'd better listen to
> knowledgeable people first ;)

:)

OK, but first of all - the list I provide is just the situation we currently
have that will change in the future, not some fundamental problem. Besides, I
can be not aware of some recent changes, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

So, the benefits of the OpenVZ against LXC.

1. Checkpointing. That's the biggest difference.
2. Resource management. Currently in LCX you may only have a per container
   user memory management. In OpenVZ we control much more resources like
   kernel memory or networking buffers
3. Entering a container. I've seen many approaches of how to join a foreign
   container (sys_hijack, sys_nsfd, sys_cloneat, etc) but AFAIK none of them
   is included in the mainline.
4. 2-level disk quota. We're trying to push one into the Al's tree however ;)
5. Bells-and-whistles like NFS/NFSd virtualization, FUSE virtualization, etc
6. Containers management like vzlist tool or various /proc files, that help
   you to track containers state and resources

> With best regards,

_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers