We do provide kernel RPMs for 7.3 binaries to our h-sphere clients as a convenience - yet, thats a whole different side, which has little to do with FreeVPS project itself.
The idea of FreeVPS is to provide very provide high level of isolation + high level of performance. The target marke is web hosting companies who want to sell VPS servers. This puts constraints like:
#1 High security (via virtualization) - thats why we have separate route tables & mount trees per VPS. The goal is to provide environment that is as close to dedicated box as posible. It should also make it imposible to affect in any way other VPSes on the server (thats why we are actively investing right now in QoS & limits)
#2 Limits & QoS - like memory, CPU, network, open files, processes, etc... (not everything is done yet)
#3 High performance - it should be posible to place 20-50 VPSes per box, running hundreds (if not thousands) or processes on a server to be a viable solution (thats why we needed O(1) scheduler).
#4 Shared disk space/memory - one of the reasons we selected the RPM based distro - is because it was easier to "unifiy" common programs accross VPSes.
#4 No modifications to userspace tools what so ever (it just too hard to maintain/support for different distros/releases/versions/etc).
So, yes, it is targeted to hosting providers. On the other hand - hosting providers is just a very hostile environment. If it will work there - it will work on desktop, it will be perfect for corporate servers. Of course, sometimes the virtualization performance penalties will be pretty high. Yet, so far, I believe, we were able to avoid that.
Regarding the perfect time - my feelings exactly, with 2.6 port only started - there are is a chance. And by pulling resources together - we can achieve something much better (I hope). And while cool is good, I also prefer it to be commerical grade virtualization software (I think it is cool in itself).
Best, Igor.
Liam Helmer wrote:
It sounds to me like there's definitely interest. The thing is, you haven't told anyone what freevps really does at this point. Virtually nobody on this list, I imagine, is running that version of redhat and that kernel. And, if they are, they're looking to upgrade, because it's very hard to secure an old redhat distribution anymore! I've looked on your site, and what it does is not that obvious. So, other than being distro-spefic, how does FreeVPS now differ from vserver? What are the design goals of FreeVPS? So far, you've mentioned that it's specific to hosting providers. Will it work for desktop systems? Small office systems? Distributed computing farms? Everywhere else vserver might be being used? Although I'm sure that hosting providers use vserver a lot, I'm also sure that there's other uses that are totally different.
Given that we're on this list, we're presumably enjoying the stuff the vserver is doing, and we're not going to want to have any of that go away. But, there's a big shakedown of the architecture going on anyways, now is honestly a perfect time to merge projects, and hopefully get lots of cool features from either side. This is not a contest of "my version is better than your version". This is simply people trying to create something that's cool. <grin> At least, as far as I can tell.
For me, personally, I need something that can be used as generically as possible. I'm using it more as an extended version of chroot, and I tend to use the chbind and chcontext commands directly. So, for me, the kernel work and the low level tools are the most important, and the userspace tools are secondary. But, I know there's tonnes of people who are using it as a little "server inside a server" environment too. What I like is something that's generic enough at the low level that it's useful in many different ways. What I'm sure a lot of other people like is the ability to use vservers with very little prior setup and knowledge (i.e. it Just Works(tm)). For me, I like to roll my own... I find that what "just works" for people tends to almost do what I want, but not quite. Ahh, the curse of open source... so many people, so many wants, so many needs, so few people who actually contribute code <grin>.
Cheers, Liam
On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 11:52, Igor Seletskiy wrote:
Sorry about the slip up :). I meant that there will be no licensing issues. We don't make money on FreeVPS, it is just a side product to H-Sphere. It is GPL - because Linux kernel is GPL. All our patches are
are available online. If you like any of them - you can take them, parts of them, adopt them to linux-vserver or what ever. We might build a consulting business around it at some moment, yet GPL is GPL - and thats the beauty of it :)
Anyway, it is up to you, I had interest to merge, yet if there is not enough interest from linux-vserver maintainers - I am fine with it as well. Lets our projects co-exists in a warm friendly atmosphere, as two separate projects. We can swap patches from time to time :)
Best Regards, Igor Seletskiy
Herbert Poetzl wrote:
On Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 07:07:31PM -0500, Igor Seletskiy wrote:
Hello Everyone,
I will follow up and add some more info. Alexey Lyashkov was hired by Positive Software in 2002 to add enhancements and speed up development of vserver project (it was vserver back then). Several more developers where added at later stages. I was mostly interested in creating virtual server environment for hosting companies. As vserver development stopped, we decided to create our own branch (freeVPS).
As the name says - it is free. As part of linux kernel - it is GPL (I don't think it is legal to produce any kind of patches to linux kernel under any different license). Also, with tools it is more complex - most of the tools are GPL as well. Only those tools that are unique to h-sphere to provision freeVPS are covered by commercial license.
So, from the licensing standpoint - there should be any issues.
hmm, a freudian slip? well let's for now assume that there are no license issues involved and you provide a list (maybe on the web) of all sources covered by GPL and they are all which is required for FreeVPS to use it.
The reason redhat kernel was select - due to some back ports from 2.6 - like O(1) scheduler - that made it very convenient & easy to improve virtualization without sacrificing too much of the performance. Also, the fact that patches are for redhat kernel - doesn't reduce its ability to work on any other linux distro - it is still linux kernel.
sure, but I doubt that a RH 7.3 kernel (2.4.18.x.y)
will be the first (or even second) choice of a debian,
gentoo, suse or even mandrake person, so a vanilla
kernel might be acceptable to some degree, but the ultimate goal should be a distro agnostic version.
I have to admit, I didn't spend much time with freeVPS lately, so I don't know it's current status, and what the tool are capable of, and what not, maybe you could elaborate on that for a start ...
That is also why I think merge between linux-vserver & freeVPS makes sense. In 2.6 - we are going to go with standard kernel (as all the necessary pieces already there).
well, that is something we both have in common, and
I don't see a problem if you base your development on the experimental releases linux-vserver does for
2.6.x as long as the software stays free ;)
Regarding how intrusive are changes - they probably are. We tried to create very good, highly isolated, high performance virtual environment that would sustain hosting environment. So we had to assume that inside each virtual server - there were "hostile" root users. I understand that it can break bunch of additional patches against vanilla kernel - yet, for us virtualization was more imported.
I would like to split this into three categories a) security features b) stealth features c) nice to have features
although I prefer lightweight and non intrusive patches, I would not hesitate to do some intrusive
modification to satisfy a) but not for b) and c)
where they can still be supported as addons
I also try to separate logic blocks and provide patches for each one, which actually allows easy portation and adaptation, and even removal of some components (was done for the iunlink part)
Regarding "patches are welcome" - it is not that easy. I cannot have my guys working on two projects. Thats why I want to be sure that
a) There are enough interest in merging (aka finding compromises when necessary)
well, obviously there _is_ enough interest on your side, and as I pointed out several time, there is always interest on working together on my side, and I already made some compromises with Alex, we had quite some discussions regarding the interface on the irc channel, I don't know if he adhered that interface but for my part I tried where possible.
b) FreeVPS design strategies are ok for linux-vserver developers
hum, hum, that is something I can only reject.
I'm not doing this project to follow some strategies
figured out by some management of yours, to promote
or sell your product more efficiently, and as I can't
speak for the other developers, I would not commit myself to following some 'design strategies' at all
so I would say, as long as your 'strategies' are okay for linux-vserver and linux-vserver strategies are okay for you, we can work together, if at some point that isn't true anymore, we part and everybody is fine
c) We can come up with a set of common goals, tasks and with a way to work together.
I'm all ears ...
my suggestions for working together would be
- have some discussions about the goals on ml or irc - separate and document the codebase (featurewise) - let the community decide about the strategy
best, Herbert
Regards, Igor Seletskiy
Herbert Poetzl wrote:
n Thu, Jan 29, 2004 at 04:34:00PM -0500, Igor Seletskiy wrote:
Hi Herbert,
My name is Igor Seletskiy. I own psoft (maker of freeVPS). I wander what are your thoughts about merging linux-vserver & freeVPS?
I believe at some points freeVPS is more advanced then linux-vserver (like our new memory accounting module, new network routing, also, & mount tables), on the other hand - I am pretty sure that there are bunch of places where linux-vserver is more advanced.
I spun off freeVPS when Jacques virtually stopped releasing anything. Yet, seeing how linux-vserver took off - I wander what your feelings are about merging projects & working together.
I always tried to keep contact to Alexey Lyashkov, who, if I'm not mistaken, started and maintains the vserver branch, now known as freeVPS (I wonder if that information is incomplete?)
I'm forwarding this to the mailing list, because I think it is of interest for the community, and I hope you do not take this as a personal offense (which isn't intended).
some facts (as I see them):
- freeVPS has some features the current linux-vserver implementation lacks (memory, networking, ...)
- freeVPS is limited to a certain kernel (RH 2.4.18) and distribution (RedHat 7.3) and I assume arch (i386) too
- the License of tools and kernel patches is not
obvious to me, although kernel patches basically default to GPL
- the changes freeVPS made to the RH kernel are very intrusive and might introduce various issues which need some reviewing and a lot of testing
my opinion:
I'm convinced that 'working together' in a well defined way, and even 'merging' various parts, provided that they are covered by an open and free license, could be very beneficial for both projects, but I currently do not see a simple way to do that (ideas welcome ;) ...
That said, I'm not convinced that it can't be done, it
just needs some work on both sides and especially some
official statements from your side, what how and why
psoft is/will be involved in this (well there is a commercial product H-Sphere, right?)
btw, linux-vserver development is free, and as I said many times, patches are always welcome, so if your aim is to 'improve' the quality of a free linux-vserver implementation, publishing patches agains recent dev. versions would be a great way to do that ...
Now here is the point, where I would like to ask the community for their opinion on that issue, because I might be the current project leader, but the project itself has evolved and become a community project.
best, Herbert
Best Regards, Igor Seletskiy
_______________________________________________ Vserver mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver
_______________________________________________ Vserver mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver
_______________________________________________ Vserver mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver
_______________________________________________ Vserver mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver
_______________________________________________ Vserver mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://list.linux-vserver.org/mailman/listinfo/vserver
