RHEV Reviews

I work within the large Red Hat ecosystem. I started with Red Hat Enterprise Linux and continue to use it. I have begun utilizing their virtualization and VM technology, aiming to replace VMware. 

Additionally, I use their Syslog. Most of these are installed on Red Hat Linux, including Zabbix, Wazoo, and Keycloak. Wazoo is a SIM solution.

The biggest aspect for me is the disk usage, the virtual manager, and the deployment of machines. It has significantly improved in recent years. It used to be specialized, but now it is very similar to VMware.

Our main use cases for RHEV are that our legacy virtualization system became RHEV, which we use for the container environment, and we moved a lot of our workloads that were running on the VMware side.

The impact of RHEV on workload consolidation in our data center started first with separating Linux and Windows workloads in our environment. I don't know what percentage of savings we achieved with the Linux migrations, but I can say that 40% of the virtualization and other costs were eliminated from our legacy virtualization side. For the Windows side, we also initiated a digital transformation project, moving a lot of Windows applications to the container side and the open-source software side, which resulted in almost 70% savings of our past expenses.

We've gotten used to using Red Hat products for a long time, and the main advantage of using the same product and standardization brings some efficiency, along with cost optimization in our software and hardware environments, especially after VMware was acquired by Broadcom, which affected customers such as us. However, we haven't changed the pricing structure or lost any money against other things, so our systems are optimized, and we can say that we saved a lot of money.

Pretty much the same use cases you'd use any of the competing products like VMware or a Microsoft solution. It's a virtualization platform.

I've deployed this at a couple of different places. It always comes down to cost and the ability to still adhere to your ITSM-type standards. I've benchmarked a lot of virtualization solutions, and RHEV is the fastest – it has the least amount of overhead. And it's cheap too.

The product has a good price. The major difference between RHEV and VMware is the price. RHEV’s cost is much less compared to VMware.

Management of RHEV is not as easy as VMware. Some features do not work. The product does not provide features similar to VMware’s VMotion. After creating the cluster, the VM is moved to another node if we move down. However, the VM does not move the parent node automatically. It has to be moved manually. VMware moves it automatically. RHEV moves it to the parent node only if we restart.

Everything can be handled in VMware through the GUI. However, in RHEV, some things can be managed through UI, and others cannot. We have to troubleshoot and use CLI. A few features of the product do not work as well as those in VMware.

They use various application and database servers, including small Oracle databases, Postgres databases, and others supporting Java applications. They also use servers like Tomcat and Apache.

RHEV reduces the cost compared to VMware.

When you purchase RHEV, you are essentially buying a subscription license. This license can be integrated with various client types, including these integrations with the subscription.

My company uses RHEV for the CRM tool we use.

With RHEV, the cyberattacks should be fewer. I want RHEV to be better protected.

We use this solution to build privacy clouds for our clients.

We find the ease of use of this solution to be invaluable. It is user-friendly and integrates well with other software.

The high availability and live VM migration are the most useful aspects of the solution.

It's very difficult to deploy.

There is not any proper documentation on the site to reference. They need to really share more details and documents about the product.