Report Finds OpenStack Still Being Debated In The Industry (sdtimes.com) 32
mmoorebz writes: Talligent, a provider of cost- and capacity-management solutions for OpenStack and hybrid clouds, announced its 2016 State of OpenStack Report yesterday. In the report, it identified some concerns IT professionals have with OpenStack, its use cases, and some barriers professionals are facing. John Meadows, vice president of business development at Talligent, said that businesses should have confidence in the path OpenStack is taking. "Companies considering adopting OpenStack should understand that there are still challenges with regards to complexity and deployment," said Meadows. "A successful OpenStack deployment will include some mix of technical expertise, operational tools, and the support of a solid OpenStack partner." Additionally, the shift to an on-demand cloud for IT service delivery requires a new approach to tracking, managing and comparing IT resources, said Meadows. Management tools should be designed to support automation, and deliver real-time insight for OpenStack adoption.
BUZZWORD BINGO! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For dark is the suede that mows like a harvest!
Re: (Score:2)
No, what it says is that there is nothing that is turn-key. This isn't (yet) something you can just choose to deploy; you will have to hire real engineers to implement it for you.
For corporations that means, if your CTO is an engineer and says you have the resources, then do it. Otherwise, don't.
For small business that means, wait.
What (Score:4, Insightful)
What industry?
What is OpenStack?
What is a "hybrid cloud"? What is an "on-demand cloud"? What is a "cloud"?
If I have to ask what three or more things are, or if I have to ask what any one thing is more than once, then you're a fucking troll selling "aaS" shit and you should be run out of town by an angry mob.
Can we wake up from this nightmare now and go back to owning and controlling our hardware, software, and data?
Re: (Score:2)
Not to worry. Wait until some dumbass CIO convinces his company to move all the infrastructure over to the "on-demand cloud", and the whole thing melts down in a sea of buzz words and marketspeak.
It will be a good day for pitchfork manufacturers on that day, let me tell you!
Re: (Score:2)
uhm, lots of us are already using 'on demand' clouds ... thats what you call an open stack install.
In fact, most intelligent companies with any sizable number of servers has, management of failures is ridiculously easier. So much so that the performance loss and extra complexity isn't worth mentioning well before you get to 20 physical servers. For those of us running hundreds and thousands ... openstack isn't even a tiny bit complex compared to the shit we run on top of it.
Re: (Score:1)
If you don't know what OpenStack is, Google can help.
If you don't know why you'd use it, they're not talking to you.
If you just hate the cloud, I'd suggest a new line of work.
"...and the support of a solid OpenStack partner" (Score:5, Insightful)
"And, you know, by a weird coincidence, we're an OpenStack partner. What are the odds, hey?"
Re:"...and the support of a solid OpenStack partne (Score:5, Funny)
Report from consultancy recommends enterprises adopt best practices by hiring best-practice consultants.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you can't blame them for pitching what they do.
On the other hand, having seen certain DIY cloud implementations, you probably do need someone who knows how to set it up if you actually want to use it. If you don't have that in house, then you need someone who can come in and drop it in.
I'm sure it is great if you have sufficient need and sufficient resources to make an actual private cloud something worth running so that the overhead is worth it, but there is definitely overhead to operating and admi
Re:"...and the support of a solid OpenStack partne (Score:5, Insightful)
OpenStack is one of those half-finished open source projects that doesn't really give you all the pieces to do the job. A lot of people think it means you can have a turnkey private cloud with zero admin overhead - like AWS without paying for it. The reality is that keeping it up and running still requires a competent ops team.
Re: (Score:2)
"And, you know, by a weird coincidence, we're an OpenStack partner. What are the odds, hey?"
That the word "OpenStack" is ued no less than eight times in the short summary is rather telling.
This is slashvertisement, plain and simple.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, it was a marketing blast. That should have been obvious from the first few words.
However, since it was about a report about OpenStack, it would seem the mentions were pertinent. It's not like they wrote an article about CPU design and threw the references in.
TL;DR: OpenStack is not for everyone, but if you want it, you need to pay Talligent lots of money because your IT staff are idiots. And private cloud.
Other libvirt / qemu based systems have more contr (Score:2)
Other libvirt / qemu based systems have more control over VM settings.
Also you can drive it on your own with virsh commands.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Openstack uses libvirt/qemu/. Libvirt is the default. What Libvirt doesn't give you:
- SDN, including advanced services such as FWaaS, LBaaS, DNSaaS, VPNaaS
- Scalable block storage
- Quick and easy imaging of VMs
If there is another open-source cloud solution that does what Openstack does better than Openstack, I know a lot of people who would be interested in it.
News at 11 (Score:2)
So a company who provides support and consulting services for OpenStack deployments ... says you should have help with your OpenStack deployment ...
Yet the headline is something about it being 'debated'.
Are you guys fucking retarded? Seriously? Can you not read? What do you think is being 'debated'? Other than making up headlines that are flat out lies, what is the purpose of so ridiculously incorrect information?
Garbage (Score:4, Interesting)
Open Stack is complete and total garbage. I worked on for a company with an OS cluster and I was on their security team briefly. I was moved to other projects that had more money coming in. OS had no customers, the few offerings we tried to put on it were constantly crashing out and having reliability issues. For political reasons, we couldn't move that project to its own VMs and the company continued to haemorrhage money on the OpenStack team.
There's no CVE mailing list either. I had to scrape their LaunchPad to get the latest CVEs and put them in our work request system. Sometimes it would be two weeks before Connonical would even create a package for it (we talked about building our own packages .. )
The company I currently work for has an OpenStack cluster with huge reliability problems as well.
Fuck Open Stack.
Also, fuck Docker in production.
Re: (Score:1)
I can see the problems you face with OpenStack; it's incompleteness by design ist something all of those dual licensed "open" software solutions face - Alfresco or Pentaho f.i.
I am about to build a POC around Docker in my company, where i am trying get rid of problems regarding the classical way of deploying applications. What problems did you face with Docker in production?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't use classical methods for deploying applications any more. There are some really good provisioning systems out there now. The Puppet module for Docker will not only handle deployment, it even adds the support stuff to auto-restart containers if the Docker controller reboots. Which for some reason wasn't considered a priority by the Docker folks themselves.