Ancestors

Written by gazter@aussie.zone on 2024-10-11 at 11:39

What kind of hosting service will allow this?

https://aussie.zone/post/14428203

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from gazter@aussie.zone

Written by 𝓢𝓮𝓮𝓙𝓪𝔂𝓔𝓶𝓶 on 2024-10-11 at 12:03

A VPS is already a VM and nesting VMs, even if you get it to work, is generally a Bad Idea™️.

What you’re asking for is squarely in “bare metal” territory. Does that reduce your flexibility? Sure. But it doesn’t entirely eliminate it. Down the road if you decide you need more RAM or disk those are things you can have added (at a cost). CPU would likely necessitate a migration to a different system so I’d keep that in mind during initial sizing. Also, if you are using proxmox, migration will be as simple as backing up a container/VM and restoring it at the destination.

Your other alternative is multiple VPSes or possibly augmenting the bare metal server with one or more VPSes.

As far as unified billing goes, just have all the services with the same provider. Most providers I’ve encountered offer both services.

I can’t speak to providers in our around Sydney, but I’d recommend checking out lowendbox.com to start your search.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from SeeJayEmm@lemmy.procrastinati.org

Written by gazter@aussie.zone on 2024-10-11 at 13:22

Thanks. As bare metal is quite a bit more expensive, what would I lose by going to a VPS? I’m assuming Proxmox and Windows, assuming I wanted to go with a Linux VPS. Would there be issues with running Docker containers with the VPS?

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from gazter@aussie.zone

Written by fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 2024-10-11 at 15:03

With a vps expect to lose all virtualization

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Written by BearOfaTime@lemm.ee on 2024-10-11 at 16:09

It’s already all virtualized, so from customer perspective, advantages of virtualization aren’t there (single box, maximizing use of local resources, etc).

Wouldn’t you be able to do containers in a Linux VPS though? To the host, it’s just a virtualized Linux, from Linux’ perspective, those containers are local resources.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from BearOfaTime@lemm.ee

Written by fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 2024-10-11 at 16:28

Docker Desktop for Linux runs a Virtual Machine (VM).

Looks like you’d still need virtualization.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Toot

Written by Max on 2024-10-11 at 17:28

Docker desktop is not what most people on Linux are using. They’re using docker engine directly, which doesn’t run in a vm, and doesn’t require virtualization if you use the same kernel inside the containers.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from maxwellfire@lemmy.world

Descendants