If you’ve checked out both RHEV 3 as well as running KVM on RHEL 6, you’ve no doubt found pros and cons for going one way or the other with your hypervisors. RHEV-H offers a simple appliance approach that is already tuned and configured. KVM on RHEL 6 allows for customization while still offering the benefits of the high-speed KVM hypervisor. Which one should you use?
- RHEV-M installs from command-line on RHEL 6 (no Windows host dependency)
- RHEV-H rebased from RHEL 5 to RHEL 6 (gaining several years of improvements)
- RESTful API
A new upstream project to pull from – oVirt.org (like Fedora for RHEL)
I’ve been using the RHEV 3 beta in his lab for several months and hasn’t had so much as a hiccup. I can’t wait to switch to the G.A. release (new toys!!!).
Congratulations to the RHEV team for this release. For more information on RHEV 3.0, go to :
So you’re planning out a single environment around the soon to be released 3.0 version of RHEV. You know you’re going to eventually have multiple environments by the end of the year, and each environment will need to have varying levels of separation. You know you can set up IPtables and SELinux, but that’s host and VM level. VLANs provide additional virtualization, but again, that’s at the network level.
What can we do at the storage level that will support and complement the levels of virtualization and separation found at the compute and network layers that would support multiple RHEV environments? Would this make high availability, scaling out, scaling up, and load balancing more difficult?
What if I told you that you could virtualize a NetApp controller, and thereby answer, “yes” to all of the questions above? Continue reading “Supporting Multiple RHEV 3.0 Environments Simultaneously”