RHEV is being used to implement an open-source hypervisor (KVM) with an easy-to-use front end for our customers. Our organization is exploring the feasibility of using it to deploy to multiple external locations in order to make management of VMs easy for remote administrators. It has a very well documented Python API, which makes automation easier to implement.
Pros
Automation integration
Migration of VMs from one physical host to another
Support for open-source community projects, such as Gluster, Cinder, and Glance
Standardization of deployment between the baseline products (e.g. stand-alone vs. appliance should support same configuration options)
Improve WebUI navigation
Likelihood to Recommend
Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization (RHEV) is well suited for environments where skilled Linux/Python engineers are available to help configure, install, and deploy it. The majority of the back-end of the product is written in Python and when issues arise, engineers will need to parse log files generated by Python. It is not well suited for Microsoft Windows only shops.
RHEV is used as a one stop solution for virtual environments due to it being part of the RedHat distro. Business problems that come with this is the costs associated with the implementation of such a solution.
Pros
Any issues/bugs with RHEV can be fixed by using bugzilla to get in contact with RH support. The support is fantastic and a reply is usually given fairly quickly.
Integration into RedHat distro is seamless as it is already baked into it's kernel.
Support for OpenStack allows for more customization with VM templates and advanced network configuration management.
Cons
I would like to see more cloud automated solutions with RHEV with kickstarting nodes without external assistance with tools such as cobbler/foreman.
If the above cant be done, then more compatibility or support for other open source tools.
Likelihood to Recommend
RHEV is most suited in any situation that requires VM management. If you work with openstack then using RHEV would be something to look at since it does have support for it. It might be less appropriate if you are just needing to save cost. However, using something like oVirt (similar if not the same as RHEV) would be better even though it would take a little more work to use oVirt as oVirt is not baked into the kernel.
VU
Verified User
Employee in Information Technology (51-200 employees)
we are using RHEV as a replacement for VSphere as a cheaper and better integration with KVM
Pros
Integrate with KVM
Python API is easier
integration with puppet and cobbler
Cons
better documentation on issues
Faster patch releases
better integration with OVA
Likelihood to Recommend
Well suited for a Linux based deployment utilizing KVM and needing a web interface. Most useful for people wanting to use an API to act against the hypervisor
VU
Verified User
Engineer in Information Technology (51-200 employees)
