On Monday, September 12, 2016 at 10:40:24 AM UTC+2, Lukas Zapletal wrote: > > Unless you get your hands dirty, chances are low. I haven't heard of > many users of libvirt-nonKVM in our community. >
I would like to jump into this since I'm in a similar situation to Alvin. We recently started experimenting with LXD, a Canonical product that extends on top of LXC. After some initial lack of enthusiasm I rapidly found myself literally loving this tool: the technology is easy to understand, capable and solid, at the point that I'm planning to convert most of our VMs to this container technology. LXD is unfortunately lacking a pre-made orchestration frontend and I see Foreman as the perfect candidate to complete the puzzle: 1. select container profile (network/cpu/disk constraints, OS, etc.) 2. deploy 3. eventually destroy if short lived The big advantage compared to docker lies in the functionality of LX(C)/LXD: while Docker is a process-oriented container technology, LXC is an OS oriented one, hence it could be an almost 1-to-1 replacement for fatter and more resource intensive full VMs while incrementing the density on the host tenfold. If only I had the programming skills I'd start working on such a plugin since I see real benefits. I can understand it's not so widespread, hence the lack of support. Nicola -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Foreman users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/foreman-users. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
