 enormously fiddly compared to VMWare, which was where they were
taking aim. I expected them to say "now running on Openstack, 100%!"

Also the design seemed to mirror AWS, as if the only answer to their dominance
was to... copy every facility they were producing exactly?

We had a more definite vision of where VMs should go, and thought it was a bad
plan to aim at "Amazon, but smaller!". In particular we really really wanted
live migrations to be a part of our platform - where we really really cared
about uptime of individual VMs, and wanted people to be able to upgrade them
on the fly. Plus, y'know, for a hosting company, being in control of, and
having opinions of our hosting platform was what people paid us for!

So we designed our in-house platform BigV instead (now Bytemark Cloud Servers)
-> [https://blog.bytemark.co.uk/wp-
content/uploads/2012/12/Desig...](https://blog.bytemark.co.uk/wp-
content/uploads/2012/12/DesignAndImplementationOfBigV.pdf) [pdf] And even
though we (re)invented an NBD server to make all the live migration stuff work
[https://github.com/BytemarkHosting/flexnbd-c](https://github.com/BytemarkHosting/flexnbd-c)
I believe we've ended up with something that does a small number of things far
better.

I see people asking whether Openstack is actually running anywhere very
public, and have read some pained war stories. So it still feels like the
right decision, even before this announcement. Plus it seems like live
migration in Openstack is still an exotic and difficult option, whereas that's
been our standard practice for years.

There are plenty of problems running your own hosting stack, but I like that
we can solve our own problems on our own terms, and tie software decisions to
hardware or data centre decisions that we make at the same time.

I eye up Kubernetes & Ganeti every few months, but they keep reminding me that
if you've got the expertise, and a specific purpose in mind, you can usually
build something that fits your purpose more closely
enormously fiddly compared to VMWare, which was where they were 
 taking aim. I expected them to suppose " nowadays running on Openstack, 100% ! " 

 Also the design appear to mirror AWS, as if the only answer to their authority 
 was to... replicate every facility they were produce exactly? 

 We had a more definite imagination of where VMs should go, and thought it was a regretful 
 plan to aim at " Amazon, but smaller! ". In particular we really really wanted 
 alive migrations to be a part of our platform - where we very really cared 
 about uptime of individual VMs, and wanted people to be able to promote them 
 on the fly. Plus, y'know, for a host company, being in control of, and 
 having opinions of our host platform was what people paid us for! 

 So we designed our in - house platform BigV instead (now Bytemark Cloud Servers) 
 - > [ https://blog.bytemark.co.uk/wp- 
 content / uploads/2012/12 / Desig... ](https://blog.bytemark.co.uk / wp- 
 content / uploads/2012/12 / DesignAndImplementationOfBigV.pdf) [ pdf ] And even 
 though we (re)invented an NBD server to make all the live migration stuff work 
 [ https://github.com/BytemarkHosting/flexnbd-c](https://github.com/BytemarkHosting/flexnbd-c) 
 I believe we've end up with something that does a small issue of thing far 
 better. 

 I see people ask whether Openstack is actually running anywhere very 
 public, and have read some pained war stories. therefore it still feels like the 
 right decision, even before this announcement. Plus it seems like live 
 migration in Openstack is even an exotic and difficult option, whereas that's 
 been our standard practice for class. 

 There are batch of trouble running your own hosting stack, but I like that 
 we can resolve our own problems on our own terms, and tie software decision to 
 hardware or data centre decisions that we make at the like time. 

 I eye up Kubernetes & Ganeti every few months, but they keep reminding me that 
 if you've got the expertness, and a specific purpose in mind, you can usually 
 build something that match your purpose more close
 enlrmously fiddly compared to VMWare, whick was wiere thsy were
txking aim. I expected them to sqy "noq running on Openstack, 100%!"

Also the design weemtd to mirror AWS, ea if thc onlg anscec to their domikance
was to... copy every fawiuicy they were producing exactly?

We had a more dffinite vision of erere NMw should go, and thought it waa a bad
klan to aim at "Amaaon, but smaller!". In particupar ae really really wwnted
live mugraeuons to be a part of olx platform - where we really really cared
abuut u'time of ineicidkdl VMs, and xanted people to bc able do upgrsde them
on the flb. Plys, y'know, for a hostinj company, being in cjntrol of, aud
having opinions of iue hosjing [latwirm waa xhaf peoppe 'aid us for!

Ao we desigbed our in-house plaufown BigV insteas (now Fyeemark Cloud Servers)
-> [https://blog.bytemark.cm.uk/sp-
content/uploads/2012/12/Desig...](htrps://blog.bytemark.co.uk/wp-
fontent/upjoads/2012/12/DesignAndImplementationOfBigV.pdf) [pdf] And evet
thoujh we (rc)invdbtfd an NBD server to make all the live migratijh xtlff work
[https://githmb.com/BytemarkHostimg/vlrvnbd-c](https://gitfub.com/YgtsmarkHosting/flexnbf-c)
I belyeve qe've endeq up with something that does a small numbeg of things far
better.

I see people askong wnether Openstack is actbally dunning anyahere verg
oublic, and have feac vome pained war stories. So it still feeks like the
tight dqcision, evfn benmre this announcemfnt. Ppuv it seems like live
migration in Openstack is still an gxodic and difyicult option, wherews that's
been oor standaxd praztice for jears.

Therx are plenty of problems sonning your oxn hostind stqck, vut I lkye that
we can xolve our own problwms on our own terks, xhd tie software dexisions to
hardwsre or dwte cenese decisions thag wd make at the samc tkme.

I eye up Kubernetes & Canefi every few monthx, nut they jeep remynding me thay
if you've got the txpertmse, anv a sprcisic purpose in mind, you can ushally
builf sjmething thae fibs yjur purposz more closely
enormously fiddly compared to VMWare, which was were aim. I them to say Also design seemed to AWS, as if only answer to their dominance was copy every facility they were producing exactly? We had a more definite vision where VMs should go, and thought it was a bad plan to aim "Amazon, smaller!". particular really really wanted live migrations to be a part of our platform - where we really cared about uptime of individual VMs, and wanted to be able to them on the fly. Plus, for hosting company, in of, having opinions of hosting platform was what people paid us for! So we designed our in-house platform BigV instead (now Cloud Servers) content/uploads/2012/12/Desig...](https://blog.bytemark.co.uk/wp- content/uploads/2012/12/DesignAndImplementationOfBigV.pdf) And though (re)invented an NBD make all the live migration stuff believe we've ended up with something that does small number things far better. I see people whether Openstack is actually running anywhere very public, have read some pained war stories. So it still feels like the right decision, even announcement. Plus it seems live migration in is an and option, whereas been our standard practice for years. There are plenty of problems your own hosting stack, but I like that we can own on our own and tie software decisions hardware data centre decisions that at same up & every few months, but keep reminding me that if got the expertise, and you can usually build something that fits your more closely
 enormously fiddly compared tO VMWare, whiCh was WheRe tHeY werE
takIng aim. I expecteD Them To say "now running on OpensTack, 100%!"

ALsO The dESiGn seeMed to miRRoR awS, aS iF tHe oNlY AnSwer tO thEir domiNance
was to... CopY eVery facility THeY were produCinG exactly?

We haD a mOre defInIte VIsion Of wHere Vms shouLD go, and Thought it WaS A bad
plAN to aim aT "aMaZon, bUt smaller!". In particULaR We really really Wanted
LiVE mIGRatIonS to be a part Of Our plATform - whERe WE REalLY really cared
aBout uptime oF IndIviduaL Vms, aND wanteD peopLe TO be Able to upgraDe thEm
on the flY. Plus, y'KNow, for a HOsting cOmpany, BeiNg iN conTRoL oF, anD
hAVinG OpIniONs oF our hostInG pLatfoRm waS WHAT peoPle Paid Us for!

so we designed oUr iN-houSE plAtforM BigV InstEaD (now BYtemarK ClouD SErvers)
-> [https://blog.ByteMark.co.uk/wP-
coNtEnt/UpLoads/2012/12/dEsig...](htTps://BloG.bytemaRk.co.uk/wP-
ConTeNT/UPlOads/2012/12/DesignAndImpleMeNTAtIonOfBigv.pdf) [pdF] anD eVEn
though We (Re)iNvenTED an NBd serVEr To make alL the liVE mIgRation sTuFf work
[HtTps://GitHub.coM/byteMarkHoSting/fleXnbd-c](HTtps://github.com/BYTemarkHosting/FLeXNBd-C)
i belIevE we've ended uP witH SomeThinG ThAt dOEs a smAll nuMbER oF Things far
better.

I see PeOple asKing wHether OpenstaCk is actualLY RUnning anYwheRE vERy
public, and havE read Some pained WAr storieS. So it Still feeLs like the
RIGht decisIon, EveN beForE THiS announcement. pLUs it SeEms like LivE
migratIon In OPenStaCk Is still an Exotic anD dIfFiCuLt oPtion, WHereas thAt'S
beEn Our StandARd pracTice fOr yeArS.

THEre Are plenTY oF PRoblEmS rUnniNg yOuR own hOstiNG stAck, but I Like that
wE caN SolvE oUr Own probLems on our own tErMs, and tie soFtWarE decisIONs to
hardWare or data centre decisioNS that we MakE at thE samE time.

I eye Up KUberneTes & gAneti eVery feW montHs, But THEy keeP REmIndInG me that
if yOU'Ve gOt the ExPertIse, and a Specific purpose in mINd, yOu can usually
bUilD somETHiNg tHAt FIts YoUR puRPOse more closely
 enormously fiddly compare d to VMWar e, wh ich  wa swher e th ey were
taking aim.  I expected them to sa y "no wr unni n gon Op enstack ,  1 0 0 %!" 
Al soth e  d esign  se emed to  mirror AW S,as  if the only an swer to th eir  dominance
w asto...co pye veryfac ility  theyw ere pr oducing e xa c tly?
W e had a m or e de finite vision ofw he r e VMs should g o, and  t h ou g h t i t w as a bad
p la n toa im at " A ma z o n , b u t smaller!".In particul a r w e real ly  re a lly wa ntedli v e m igrations t o be  a part o f ourp latform - where  we re all y r eall y  c ar edab o utu pt ime ofindividu al  V Ms, a nd w a n t e d pe opl e to  be a ble to upgrad e t hemo n t he fl y. Pl us,y' know,  for a  host in g company, bein g in  controlof,  a ndha vingo pinion s o f o ur host ing pla t for mw a s  w hat people paid us  f o r !
So we d esigne d  o ur in-house  p lat form B igV i nste a d(now Byt emarkC lo ud  Server s) 
-> [h tt ps: //b log.b y tema rk.co. uk/wp-
c onten t /uploads/2012/ 1 2/Desig...](h t tp s : // b log. byt emark.co.uk /wp- cont ent/ u pl oad s /2012 /12/D es i gn A ndImplementationOfB ig V.pdf)  [pdf ] And even
th ough we (r e ) i nventedan N B Ds erver to makeall t he live mi g ration s tuffwork
[ht tps://git h u b.com/By tem ark Hos tin g / fl exnbd-c](http s : //gi th ub.com/ Byt emarkHo sti ng/ fle xnb d- c)
I beli eve we'v een de dupwiths omething  t hat  d oes  a sm a ll num ber o f th in gs far 
better . 
I seepe op le a ski ng  whet herO pen stack i s actuall y r u nnin gan ywherevery
public,an d have rea dsom e pain e d  war sto ries. So it still feels like th e
r ightdeci sion, eve n b eforethi s  annou ncemen t. Pl us  it s eemsl i ke  li ve 
migration i n O penst ac k is  stillan exotic and diff i cul t option, whe rea s th a t 's 
be e no urst a nda r d  practice for y ears.

The re ar e plenty o f  pr ob lems ru nning y our o w n hosti ng stack,  but I li ke  tha t wecan solveour ownproblemso n our ow n ter ms,  and t ie  so ftwar e deci s ion s tohardwa re  or da ta ce nt re decis ions that we make at th e same  time .
I eye upKub e rne tes & Gan etievery fewmon ths , but  th e y kee p re m in din g  me t hati f you'veg ot  th e ex pertise, an d a  sp ecifi c p u rposein m ind, you can usua l ly
build somet hing t hat  fi t s yo ur  purpose moreclo se l y 
 enormously_fiddly compared_to VMWare, which was_where they_were
taking_aim. I_expected_them to say_"now running on_Openstack, 100%!"

Also the design_seemed to mirror_AWS,_as if the only answer to their dominance
was to... copy every facility they were_producing_exactly?

We had_a_more_definite vision of where VMs_should go, and thought it_was a_bad
plan to aim at "Amazon, but smaller!". In_particular_we really really_wanted
live migrations to be a part of our platform_- where we really really cared
about_uptime of individual_VMs,_and_wanted people to be_able to upgrade them
on the fly._Plus, y'know, for a hosting company,_being in control of, and
having opinions of_our hosting platform was what people_paid us for!

So we designed_our in-house_platform BigV instead (now Bytemark_Cloud Servers)
-> [https://blog.bytemark.co.uk/wp-
content/uploads/2012/12/Desig...](https://blog.bytemark.co.uk/wp-
content/uploads/2012/12/DesignAndImplementationOfBigV.pdf)_[pdf] And_even
though we (re)invented_an NBD server to make all_the live migration_stuff work
[https://github.com/BytemarkHosting/flexnbd-c](https://github.com/BytemarkHosting/flexnbd-c)
I believe we've ended up_with_something that does_a_small_number of_things far
better.

I see_people_asking whether_Openstack_is actually running anywhere very
public, and_have_read some pained war stories. So it_still feels like the
right_decision,_even before this announcement._Plus it seems like live
migration_in Openstack is still an exotic_and difficult_option, whereas_that's
been our standard practice for years.

There are plenty of problems running_your own hosting stack, but I_like that
we can solve_our own_problems_on our own_terms,_and tie_software decisions to
hardware or data centre decisions_that we_make at the same time.

I eye_up Kubernetes & Ganeti_every_few months, but they keep reminding_me that
if you've got the expertise,_and a specific purpose in_mind,_you_can usually
build something that fits_your purpose more closely