|
cheese-cube posted:It could be worse. Imagine if the web UI was a JavaWS applet Please don't give VMware any ideas. We have enough java fanboys here that they might try to push this though.
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 16:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 07:24 |
|
|
Ugh no you're giving me flashbacks to the time I had to do maintenance on a 24 host Sun cluster.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 16:07
|
|
|
Yeah, the web client is pretty bad, but it's no Cisco ASDM.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 16:33
|
|
|
Erwin posted:Yeah, the web client is pretty bad, but it's no Cisco ASDM. This. That lovely thing would max out my CPU so fast. Was so happy to dump all of our ASAs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 16:41
|
|
|
DevNull posted:Please don't give VMware any ideas. We have enough java fanboys here that they might try to push this though. coming soon to ESXi - node.js/ruby on rails management
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
The OP has listed as a Don't, "Not use consumer grade switches" Just to make sure I understand correctly, I should use consumer grade switches? I promise I'm not just being a dick about grammer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 17:20
|
|
|
You should not use consumer grade switches. You should not use just any enterprise switches, either. Storage traffic is demanding, and you need a managed switch that has large buffers and a large enough backplane. When you buy storage hardware, the vendor can make a recommendation, or in many cases can bundle the switches and cover the entire package in the support contract. edit: unless this is for a home lab. Then you can do whatever.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
It's been years since I've seen even a cheapo managed gigabit switch that couldn't fully saturate every port with a backplane to support it. Large buffers are nice if you're converging the san/lan and need it to prioritize traffic accordingly but they also mean latency. If you're getting to the point where you're hitting them hard and you don't absolutely know what you are doing then there is likely something terribly wrong happening. You can absolutely get away with low-end managed switches on the san side (and lan for that matter) so long as you commit to not converging networks. Going this route is probably a cost-savings measure and buying two $150 low-end managed switches has some savings over $800-$1000 units. I wouldn't be doing it for more than maybe 3 or 4 hosts hooked up to relatively slow storage, but if that fits your requirements then it can be an option.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
I've heard rumours that vSphere 5.5U3 was coming "soon" for a little while now. Does anyone know anything more about when it is coming out? The rumours state that U3 supposedly has the fix for Tools causing rare random Windows bluescreens when using quiesced snapshots and I'd really like to get that fixed. This fucker has been around for far too long: http://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US&cmd=displayKC&externalId=2115997
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
evol262 posted:Sometimes (often), doing productive business work means using stuff you don't like. VMware doesn't care whether mAlfunkti0n likes flash. They care whether customers that pay tons of money are willing to use flash to use VMware (yes), and whether using a web client lowers the administrative overhead of requiring users of the client to need local admin (or software install rights) so they could keep up with the kajillion updates to the C# client that all needed admin (yes). You've hurt my feelings, the tears are now flowing. Flash sucks, it has sucked for years and it costs corporations a great deal of money either having to resolve security issues around it or cleaning the malware that was delivered because of malicious flash ads. Corporations that don't look forward are left behind when people get fed up and an alternative comes out. Somehow though you felt that I was saying VMware should change it simply for me, sorry that I somehow gave you that impression as I was simply stating that .. as you read, I hate flash and asked if they were still using it. Down boy. Down.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
BangersInMyKnickers posted:You can absolutely get away with low-end managed switches on the san side (and lan for that matter) so long as you commit to not converging networks. Going this route is probably a cost-savings measure and buying two $150 low-end managed switches has some savings over $800-$1000 units. I wouldn't be doing it for more than maybe 3 or 4 hosts hooked up to relatively slow storage, but if that fits your requirements then it can be an option. There's very little slow storage being made anymore. Flash is cheap and ubiquitous, so even relatively inexpensive arrays have the capability of driving a substantial amount of throughput in short bursts during highly cacheable IO. There are definitely switches out there that lack the buffer size (Cisco 2950 comes to mind) that will drop bursty storage traffic due to inadequate buffer sizes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 19:54
|
|
|
mAlfunkti0n posted:Flash sucks, it has sucked for years and it costs corporations a great deal of money either having to resolve security issues around it or cleaning the malware that was delivered because of malicious flash ads. Corporations that don't look forward are left behind when people get fed up and an alternative comes out. Yes, flash is bad. VMware picked it anyway. So you still have to use it until you don't need VMware. Life is like that sometimes. Lots of things don't agree with my preferences. I suck it up. mAlfunkti0n posted:Somehow though you felt that I was saying VMware should change it simply for me, Not really. It's just that the response to "I hate flash and disable it everywhere" is "a lot of stuff still uses flash for a variety of reasons; html5/novnc/js don't cut it sometimes, and you'll have to use flash in those instances".
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
evol262 posted:Lots of things don't agree with my preferences. I suck it up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 20:25
|
|
|
evol262 posted:Please pass along more insights about the imminent demise of an alternatives to the 10,000lb gorilla in this arena. The 10,000lb gorilla gets swept away when they refuse to believe anything other than they are the best available. I'm sure Microsoft thought they'd never fall, but they ignored customer desires and forged their own path. Flash sucks for many reasons, it needs to die and do so quickly. I am not arguing my "preference" to this, it is a technical turd and has been forced upon people for well past its expiration date. Vulture Culture posted:get off your high horse and stop being an insufferable turd, people don't like things sometimes mAlfunkti0n fucked around with this message at 20:36 on Aug 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
NippleFloss posted:There's very little slow storage being made anymore. Flash is cheap and ubiquitous, so even relatively inexpensive arrays have the capability of driving a substantial amount of throughput in short bursts during highly cacheable IO. There are definitely switches out there that lack the buffer size (Cisco 2950 comes to mind) that will drop bursty storage traffic due to inadequate buffer sizes. There's tons of slow storage being made and will continue to be. 5400/7200rpm disks are far and away the most economical way to store large quantities of data. What you are going to see is more and more flash moving up to your host to accelerate r/w locally which reduces bandwidth requirements on your SAN. As for the Cisco switches, yes those are 13 year old piles of poo poo that don't have enough backplane to saturate all ports. I specifically addressed that. You can buy an unmanaged piece of poo poo netgear for $30 that will perform better than a 2950. They should be buried in the desert with all the ET cartridges.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
BangersInMyKnickers posted:There's tons of slow storage being made and will continue to be. 5400/7200rpm disks are far and away the most economical way to store large quantities of data. What you are going to see is more and more flash moving up to your host to accelerate r/w locally which reduces bandwidth requirements on your SAN. Not really. Spinning disk is used almost exclusively as a capacity layer back ending flash or in high density storage that is dedicated to backup or archive. General purpose storage is all hybrid these days. Flash moving to the host layer is a thing that has been happening for years, but still hasn't superseded flash in the array because VM movement means that local cache does not remain local and coherency when using array level features like snapshots can be tricky. And caching is of limited benefit for writes. Distributed caching like on hyperconverged makes host cache more feasible, but taxes the interconnect network even more heavily.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
Vulture Culture posted:get off your high horse and stop being an insufferable turd, people don't like things sometimes Sorry not sorry for giving practical advice to make life less annoying instead of whining about things that can't/won't change. mAlfunkti0n posted:The 10,000lb gorilla gets swept away when they refuse to believe anything other than they are the best available. I'm sure Microsoft thought they'd never fall, but they ignored customer desires and forged their own path. mAlfunkti0n posted:Flash sucks for many reasons, it needs to die and do so quickly. I am not arguing my "preference" to this, it is a technical turd and has been forced upon people for well past its expiration date. Ever turned on plugin detection and had your browser warn you? At least 60% of sites use flash for something.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
evol262 posted:Sorry not sorry for giving practical advice to make life less annoying instead of whining about things that can't/won't change.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
evol262 posted:Sorry not sorry for giving practical advice to make life less annoying instead of whining about things that can't/won't change. What practical advice have you offered? You've essentially just said "stop whining this is the way it is". I didn't even ask you for an opinion in the first place, you just blurted out what was on your mind. I browse often using my iPad which, as you should very well know does not support flash in any way. I have not missed out on a single thing on the vast majority of what I browse, in fact I can't remember the last time I said "oh darn, I really wish I had flash here". I'd be willing to bet that a vast majority of sites using flash are doing so for ad delivery. Now, please feel free to set me on ignore. None of my original comments pertained to you in any way you just felt I somehow slighted your love of flash. Now back to our regularly scheduled program...
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2015 22:45
|
|
|
Vulture Culture posted:stop posting Ditto, honestly. It's a technical thread and contributing nothing but your dislike for someone's reply may as well not be a post. mAlfunkti0n posted:What practical advice have you offered? You've essentially just said "stop whining this is the way it is". I didn't even ask you for an opinion in the first place, you just blurted out what was on your mind. "VMware didn't build this software based around your or my or anybody else's like or dislike of given technologies. Some business unit built it to requirements around some set of constraints none of us know except maybe DevNull, and voicing your distaste for it doesn't change business exigencies." That is practical advice. It's not advice you want to hear, but that's too bad. We work in IT. We deal with (and sometimes write) terrible software that nobody is proud of to terrible specs. mAlfunkti0n posted:I browse often using my iPad which, as you should very well know does not support flash in any way. I have not missed out on a single thing on the vast majority of what I browse, in fact I can't remember the last time I said "oh darn, I really wish I had flash here". I'd be willing to bet that a vast majority of sites using flash are doing so for ad delivery. Now, please feel free to set me on ignore. None of my original comments pertained to you in any way you just felt I somehow slighted your love of flash. I don't wish I had flash either. But sometimes I need it. As do a lot of other people. mAlfunkti0n posted:Now back to our regularly scheduled program... Does that mean we can talk about virt again instead of bitching about the web client for the umpteenth time?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 07:13
|
|
|
The web client is tearing us apart! Think of the web client as a really good excuse to learn powershell. Too many systems administrators out there are too afraid to script things or think its difficult.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 07:53
|
|
|
evol262 posted:Ditto, honestly. It's a technical thread and contributing nothing but your dislike for someone's reply may as well not be a post. quote:Does that mean we can talk about virt again instead of bitching about the web client for the umpteenth time?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 14:22
|
|
|
I've been struggling with getting standalone-mode ovirt working to make a freenas server, and one of our sales engineers strolls by and is like gently caress that, give me a flash drive to install Xen server, I'll have you up and running in 30 minutes on this software defined storage thing that is free up to 10tb. That sounds reasonable enough since this server will be light-duty security cam storage, but am I walking into a trap?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 14:42
|
|
|
Erwin posted:You're doing nothing but being a dick for no reason. Your whole MO in every thread is to latch on to small throw-away or sarcastic comments, explain why that comment is wrong and why you're right and everyone but you is stupid, and fluff it up with 'HTH' and 'sorry not sorry.' Contributing nothing but your superiority complex may as well not be a post. He's just trolling, simply best to not feed it any longer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 14:54
|
|
|
BangersInMyKnickers posted:It's been years since I've seen even a cheapo managed gigabit switch that couldn't fully saturate every port with a backplane to support it. Large buffers are nice if you're converging the san/lan and need it to prioritize traffic accordingly but they also mean latency. If you're getting to the point where you're hitting them hard and you don't absolutely know what you are doing then there is likely something terribly wrong happening. Unfortunately I don't have access to the system anymore to get a screenshot, but at a former job, one of our clients ran a two or three host ESXi HA setup with an iSCSI SAN capable of maybe 400 IOPS with two Cisco SG300 switches handling just the storage traffic. You should have seen the drop counters and ready times. They just can't handle it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 16:21
|
|
|
Richard Noggin posted:Unfortunately I don't have access to the system anymore to get a screenshot, but at a former job, one of our clients ran a two or three host ESXi HA setup with an iSCSI SAN capable of maybe 400 IOPS with two Cisco SG300 switches handling just the storage traffic. You should have seen the drop counters and ready times. They just can't handle it. Lol, jesus. I can't believe the junk that Cisco gets away with selling.  Even your bottom-rung $100 Dell switch will blow that out of the water.  Stop giving money to Cisco.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
If not Cisco, who makes a good vlan-aware switch for home lab use? Regarding  is in order for VMware starting the project before HTML5 was as popular as it is right now. Whatever. Moving on.
Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 17:40 on Aug 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
Anyone using any software based encryption solutions for vmware? We're going back and forth between something like HyTrust vs moving smaller hosts (without shared storage) over to self encrypting drives. (these are primarily windows guests which means no bitlocker)
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:If not Cisco, who makes a good vlan-aware switch for home lab use? The SG300-10 is fine for a home lab. It supports layer-3, has a basic IOS-like CLI, and will work fine for the relatively small amount of traffic you're generating in a home lab. BangersInMyKnickers posted:Even your bottom-rung $100 Dell switch will blow that out of the water. On the other hand I've seen PowerConnect switches randomly reboot when driven under sufficient load, or just due to, say, trying to instantiate an SSH connection to the switch. Also, the SG line is probably a better comparison with the PowerConnect stuff you listed. YOLOsubmarine fucked around with this message at 19:08 on Aug 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 19:02
|
|
|
Erwin posted:You're doing nothing but being a dick for no reason. Your whole MO in every thread is to latch on to small throw-away or sarcastic comments, explain why that comment is wrong and why you're right and everyone but you is stupid, and fluff it up with 'HTH' and 'sorry not sorry.' Contributing nothing but your superiority complex may as well not be a post. I have never seen a group of people who take someone disagreeing with them as personally as SH/SC. "I disagree and here's why" isn't "you're stupid and here's why", but this is ace ignoring of any/all helpful posts I've made all over the place. My "MO" is to say what I think. It's never intended as a superiority thing. If the way I post bothers you, maybe you should just ignore me instead of complaining about it in multiple threads. "Decisions made in the development practices of enterprise software happen for X, Y, and Z reasons" is also applicable to the web client. Zero VGS posted:I've been struggling with getting standalone-mode ovirt working to make a freenas server, and one of our sales engineers strolls by and is like gently caress that, give me a flash drive to install Xen server, I'll have you up and running in 30 minutes on this software defined storage thing that is free up to 10tb. What's the struggle with bringing up freenas? It sounds like he's recommending nexenta, but not sure. Xenserver (with XenOrchestra) is also really nice, but setting up a storage VM will be similar to ovirt, probably with the same problems. Potato Salad posted:If not Cisco, who makes a good vlan-aware switch for home lab use? Fanless procurves are great and can be found relatively cheap
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 21:03
|
|
|
BangersInMyKnickers posted:Lol, jesus. I can't believe the junk that Cisco gets away with selling. You have the 100mb cisco's there, not the gigabit ones, which do match or exceed the powerconnect option. We install SG300's everywhere, not for storage traffic, but for general LAN use, powering phones etc, they do a good job.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
evol262 posted:I have never seen a group of people who take someone disagreeing with them as personally as SH/SC. "I disagree and here's why" isn't "you're stupid and here's why", but this is ace ignoring of any/all helpful posts I've made all over the place. You seem to have setup this strawman where someone has said "oh wow I can't imagine why VMware would do that they must all be braindead idiots" when in fact that is not what has been said. Let's put it this way. Please state the position that you are arguing against here.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
evol262 posted:What's the struggle with bringing up freenas? It sounds like he's recommending nexenta, but not sure. Well, I never got as far as setting up freenas, I just threw up my hands with ovirt and this guy is like "hey I'll show you how to do it with Xen and Quantastor". I wound up not even needing much help from him, I installed Xen myself, then I was stuck on creating a VM from a flash drive iso without any shared storage, but he showed me I can just share any Windows folder and point Xen at it. Then I did manage to get Quantastor running, as of the moment I can browse to the share from Windows and copy files to it, oddly deleting files doesn't work but I'll sort that out tomorrow. I know you gave me a lot of help with ovirt so I feel kind of guilty not sticking it out, but things like setting Standalone mode, bonding the two nics, or loading isos was "follow the instructions, get error messages thrown, repeat". Where this is my first experience with Xen and those all worked without incident. Much more like my experience with the free gimpy vmware version.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2015 03:04
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:You seem to have setup this strawman where someone has said "oh wow I can't imagine why VMware would do that they must all be braindead idiots" when in fact that is not what has been said. You seem to have interpreted things in a way which makes me an unreasonable rear end in a top hat who just wants to argue for no reason. Go reread. mAlfunkti0n posted:Does the webui still use flash in 6.0? Been awhile since I used it in my lab. If so, I really really really hate flash. Half the thread posted:Yes, but it's better mAlfunkti0n posted:I remember it being much better but I am sick of flash to the point its disabled across my browsers or not installed at all. evol262 posted:Sometimes (often), doing productive business work means using stuff you don't like. VMware doesn't care whether mAlfunkti0n likes flash. They care whether customers that pay tons of money are willing to use flash to use VMware (yes), and whether using a web client lowers the administrative overhead of requiring users of the client to need local admin (or software install rights) so they could keep up with the kajillion updates to the C# client that all needed admin (yes). Paraphrased:  I don't like flash, so disable flash everywhere or just don't install it. Do I still have to use it for the web client? Yes, but it's not that bad. I disable flash everywhere It's important to remember that all of us have to use software we don't like to get things done. Companies don't make decisions about whether to use frameworks based on whether their developers like it or whether it's a good solution technically. What matters is whether their customers are willing to live with it to use their software, and, in some cases, whether it makes it easier for large companies to manage user rights. The fat client required that all VMware admins have local admin rights, since it got updates on every ESX(i) update and wouldn't connect otherwise. The flash client avoids that problem, which probably makes really large customers who pay VMware lots of money really happyI'm not arguing against any position. I'm also not arguing for any position. I'm just saying that a lot goes into the decisions behind enterprise software, and that the downsides (people angry about specific java versions, flash, whatever) are usually offset by some kind of concrete gain, like reasonably good cross-platform support, removing the need for admin rights from more users (at the potential cost of additional overhead on the central/desktop IT staff that now may need to deal with j7u12 or whatever), and understanding that takes away some of the frustration. Yes, flash and java still suck, but there may have been good reasons for picking them. Flash in particular offers concrete advantages over HTML5 (and certainly HTML5 at the time they started writing the client) when it comes to keymaps and stuff, but it doesn't even matter here. The only question is "if all VMware offers is a flash client, will you still use VMware instead of XenServer/Hyper-V/RHEV?". And the answer is "yes, because Veeam doesn't work, or VAAI, or vSAN, or ease of use or some other reason". Zero VGS posted:Well, I never got as far as setting up freenas, I just threw up my hands with ovirt and this guy is like "hey I'll show you how to do it with Xen and Quantastor". Zero VGS posted:I wound up not even needing much help from him, I installed Xen myself, then I was stuck on creating a VM from a flash drive iso without any shared storage, but he showed me I can just share any Windows folder and point Xen at it. Then I did manage to get Quantastor running, as of the moment I can browse to the share from Windows and copy files to it, oddly deleting files doesn't work but I'll sort that out tomorrow. Zero VGS posted:I know you gave me a lot of help with ovirt so I feel kind of guilty not sticking it out, but things like setting Standalone mode, bonding the two nics, or loading isos was "follow the instructions, get error messages thrown, repeat". Where this is my first experience with Xen and those all worked without incident. Much more like my experience with the free gimpy vmware version.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2015 19:45
|
|
|
For someone who wants to just discuss virtualization you sure can't seem to let stuff go.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
FISHMANPET posted:"oh wow I can't imagine why VMware would do that they must all be braindead idiots" We aren't all braindead. Just like 70% of us. Flash sucks, it was a bad choice, end of story. Hopefully we get undumb and made a supported webUI that is much better.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
One thing that always irrationally irritates me is that in the Web client, if you want to do guest customization you have to save the spec whereas In the native client you can do guest customizations without having to save them first.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2015 05:16
|
|
|
sanchez posted:You have the 100mb cisco's there, not the gigabit ones, which do match or exceed the powerconnect option. We install SG300's everywhere, not for storage traffic, but for general LAN use, powering phones etc, they do a good job. Yeah, pretty much this. They're not bad SMB switches for the price, but for the love of all that is holy, do not use them for storage.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2015 15:38
|
|
|
evol262 posted:... Either of you guys know of a oslo.db bug in juno with idle timeouts? My redhat support dude is still chasing after engineers trying to understand what's happening. I can not for the life of me understand why this is a problem on a vanilla deployment. We're 5 weeks in at this point.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 23:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 07:24 |
|
|
ILikeVoltron posted:Either of you guys know of a oslo.db bug in juno with idle timeouts? My redhat support dude is still chasing after engineers trying to understand what's happening. I can not for the life of me understand why this is a problem on a vanilla deployment. We're 5 weeks in at this point.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2015 00:56
|
|