XCP-ng vs Hyper-v

I’ve been trying to tell our supporting IT company (lucky they have no keys) that i want to stay with Hyper-V.

but although they haven’t looked at XCP-ng, they stand firm on Hyper-V followed by VMware…
Please can you do a video to discuss these products ??

so i can point them and myself to it !
i know for our needs XCP-ng is more than needed !!

From a very high level, paid products such as VMware and Hyper-V are more mature and offer more features. They also offer a broader HCL list and more software solutions can integrate with them.

How many VMs are you running today? Also, do you use local or centralized storage?

XCP-NG is definately great over HyperV as it can be very easily web mnagaed direct into the VM.

We do however look after some 20+ HyperV deployments from 2 VM’s right up to 50-60+ across multiple servers.

Personally my business is XCP-NG, we host 2 HyperV hosts for a client that we look after.

I already did a video on that

And there is a PDF

1 Like

Thanks, i’ve seen this and thanks.

i was thinking more direct showcase of some features. For example iscsi setup to a new SR for hyper-V vs XCP-ng

we have 4 hosts. the setup for XCP-ng is simple and in DR just as easy to rebuild. We have a hyper-v 2 host setup that we let them setup ££ and it took 2 days just to setup the hosts, with all the shared storage, WitnessDisk etc…

we support both but i’m sure i’d rather continue supporting XCP-ng over hyper-v anyday.

and yes, i’m not 100% on hyper -v but even some simple tasks are over engineered and thus fail, and snapshots you can’t keep as they fill up and then can’t be merged. Warning 101 from company.

also noticed i’ve not seen this video before, so might be better than i thought… :smile:

We use both, much prefer xcp-ng to be honest for DR purposes with Xen Orchestra much easier and straight forward without needing third party software, and not having to worry about windows being a hyper visor either. Most things in xcp-ng are very easy to implement.

1 Like

old thread I know - I love so much about xcp-ng , I’m sort of hung up on 3 things 1) 2tb disk limitation of vhd 2) unable to expand a disk without powering down the vm 3) nothing like vconvert - much more brute force to get systems migrated in from say vsphere. we run mostly vsphere ent but I keep swinging back to xcp-ng its so easy to do so many things - especially with xoa .

thanks Tom for all the good info

1 Like

Yeah, that’s it with HyperV your one borked update to being completely offline. Much more of an attach surface as well having HyperV run on Windows - much more to go wrong.

2tb disk limitation is resolved in this link

Honestly the post you linked sounds like a total hack work around that “could” be disabled during the next system upgrade. I’m not sure I’d trust the workaround if the data on expanded set (>2Tb) were mission critical.

I don’t see the 2TB as an issue because creating virtual disks that large is bad storage design. For our clients using larger storage they are either using either a NAS or presenting iSCSI over to a virtualized WIndows server. This design is preferred no matter what hypervisor you are using.

1 Like