KVM Review

This solution integrates nicely with other soft-open-software components.

What is our primary use case?

The main use case is, of course, to run virtual machines. The specific use case is to run virtual network functions (VNFs) and the performance is very good on KVM.

What is most valuable?

A big strength with KVM is that it is an open-source component. It gets improvements from Intel, for example, and the other semiconductors. It can be sized-down to a very small package. It can be used in embedded systems as well, so it has a very good performance and it is suitable from embedded IT to big servers and supercomputers.

This solution integrates nicely with other soft-open-software components.

What needs improvement?

I would like to see a separation, so you could have KVM running in a few cores, and then you could have a real-time operating system running another core, so there is a hybrid environment with real time operating systems and Linux.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is very good. It has not crashed once since we have been using it. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I think nine out of the ten supercomputers in the world use Linux KVM, so I think that attests to the fact that it is a scalable product. It scales really well.

How is customer service and technical support?

Technical support is not top-notch.

How was the initial setup?

I think this solution is in need of an easier installation process.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It is cheaper than other competitors like VMware or Hyper-V.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We compared KVM vs VMware and did a proof-of-concept, but we decided that KVM was best suited for our needs when it came to device drivers, etc. We also considered Oracle and RedHat.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Add a Comment
Sign Up with Email