Hi Jan,

Thanks for your quick response and for pointing out some differences.
Please forgive if the implication was about a competition as that was not
my intention, but mainly to just try and determine what were the main
differences between the two implementations.

Being still new here, I am just trying to wrap my head around all of the
information and sort it appropriately so that it will allow me to better
install and setup a solidly performing private cloud on which I easily work
with our own project.

Thanks again,

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 8:33 AM, Ján Poctavek <jan.pocta...@erigones.com>

> Hi Lonnie,
> thank you for pointing out that we don't have this comparison, we'll try
> to fix that. But this is not about competition anyway. Our focus is a bit
> different.
> To answer your question: first of all, Danube Cloud (DC) is trying to be
> user friendly and easy to use in the first place. You don't need the
> dedicated headnode (the management are just few VMs that can be migrated
> anywhere). On top of that, DC includes full Zabbix install for automated
> monitoring of all nodes and hosted VMs, full featured VM backups using
> incremental ZFS snapshots, DNS server, multi-tenant IP address and networks
> management, etc.
> All this stuff is in community edition. Enterprise version is about SLA
> support, not about features (all our new work goes into the community
> edition).
> Cheers.
> Jan
> On 9. 8. 2017 13:11, Lonnie Cumberland wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
> I just started looking at the Danube release and it looks like you have
> brought things together nicely, but was trying to locate what major
> changes, improvements, or modifications the Danube release has over Triton
> and could not find a list anywhere to look over.
> I am sure that you have made some changes as your post describes to some
> degree, but was looking to try and get a feel for why I might be interested
> in installing your Danube release over Triton. One thing that I did
> immediately see on your site is that you have a Community release which
> seems to have less features than your Enterprise release while also
> offering the Danube Cloud while Joyent seems to have their single Triton
> release while focusing on the Triton Cloud services.
> This was just meant to be quick observation and I have not looked heavily
> into the Danube software while still very new to the Triton Data Center as
> well so I'm not really one to do any type of evaluations or comparisons at
> this point, but I am all for making things easier so that one can setup a
> solidly functioning private cloud so as to be able to focus on containers
> and their uses while minimizing the concerns about the infrastructure.
> Personally, I am setting up a private cloud to learn from and test, with a
> major focus on running Docker containers, micro-services and possibly
> Kubernetes at some future point.
> Cheers and have a good day,
> Lonnie
> On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 3:33 AM, Daniel Kontsek <dan...@kontsek.sk> wrote:
>> Dear Joyent and SmartOS Community,
>> we have been successfully using and integrating SmartOS at Danube Cloud
>> (Erigones) for about 5 years now. At the beginning we've built an IaaS
>> platform, which we've transformed into a full-featured software solution -
>> Danube Cloud (former Erigones SDDC) [1]. During this time, there were
>> occasional moments where we thought that a Linux hypervisor would maybe be
>> a better choice... But the strengths of SmartOS / illumos gave ourselves
>> repeatedly arguments that - YES - it was the right choice (Zones, ZFS,
>> Crossbow, DTrace... you know the perks...). We would like to say to all
>> illumos and SmartOS contributors: THANK YOU for the amazing work.
>> Although, we would like to use the SmartOS platform as it is, we have to
>> maintain some changes to the illumos-joyent and smartos-live repositories.
>> This is mostly because of support for installation/boot from hard drive
>> (contributed by Juraj Lutter), installer (prompt-config) script location
>> and other smaller changes to the installer. As far as my understanding
>> goes, Joyent would not want to support installation to hard drive but maybe
>> some other (smaller) features would be beneficial for Joyent and the
>> SmartOS community. We can create pull requests for that, but there are a
>> few topics I would like to discuss first:
>> -  AFAIK we should open merge requests here: https://cr.joyent.us/ and
>> not on GitHub, but we should create an issue on GitHub first, is this
>> correct, or can we just create CRs in Gerrit?
>> -  Shell scripts coding style (mainly svc/methods and prompt_config) is a
>> problem. We are seeing mixing of bash coding patterns, even in scripts
>> where new bash features are used. (e.g. $var vs ${var} vs "${var}", `` vs
>> $(), [ vs [[). I assume lots of these are just Solaris heritage, but some
>> scripts are new and yet we see these strange inconsistencies. I'm not going
>> to argue about line length and tabs vs spaces (although please don't mix
>> them). But as we are saying: at least do it consistently wrong :) We are
>> happily using shellcheck [2] for most of our bash scripts and it does solve
>> these kind of problems. Is there a coding style guide for shell scripts?
>> -  For example: we would love to rewrite the smartos_prompt_config.sh
>> script so it does not use global variables. Would you accept such change?
>> Daniel
>> [1]  https://github.com/erigones/esdc-ce/wiki
>>  https://github.com/koalaman/shellcheck
> *smartos-discuss* | Archives
> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/184463/=now>
> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/184463/29189741-d7570d4f> |
> Modify
> <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>
> Your Subscription <http://www.listbox.com>

Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/184463/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/184463/25769125-55cfbc00
Modify Your Subscription: 
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Reply via email to