On 10/30/14, 7:25 PM, Leam Hall wrote:
On 10/30/14 18:44, Frank Caviggia wrote:
[snip]
> Anyway, all of the above is just my opinion on things moving forward,
> hope this helps somebody.
Don't get me wrong; RHEV shouldn't be consigned to the eternal flames.
Well...the version I'm using probably should.
Likely a legacy version issue. If running a RHEV version which requires
Internet Explorer, that means:
- Deployment of RHEV 2.x, which was released on 3-NOV-2009 and EOL'd on
1-MAR-2013; or
- Deployment of RHEV 3.0, which was released on 18-JAN-2012 and EOL'd on
5-DEC-2012
When measured against expectations of a modern hypervisor, either
version above would fall laughably short. To get a sense of the releases...
RHEV 2.1 (released 3-NOV-2009)
RHEV 2.2 (released 23-JUN-2010)
RHEV 3.0 (released 18-JAN-2012)
RHEV 3.1 (released 5-DEC-2012) <--- this is when Windows requirements
were dropped
RHEV 3.2 (released 11-JUN-2013)
RHEV 3.3 (released 21-JAN-2014)
RHEV 3.4 (released 16-JUN-2014)
RHEV 3.5 in planning now
I think the potential is there given the brainpower available. If
the
right decisions are made it can become a viable contender and
potentially market leader.
Thanks! Today RHEV /shines/ in security and performance. As time moves
forward, many RHEV subsystems are being integrated with OpenStack
services (e.g. neutron, glance in RHEV 3.4). The plan is to created
spanned subsystems between RHEV and OpenStack environments -- allowing
RHEV to participate in the development velocity of the OpenStack community.