Oracle VM Reviews

We are using Oracle VM as the platform for running our Oracle databases. The templates that are available for provisioning database nodes are very helpful. Using these pre-configured templates makes the deployment process quick and efficient.

By virtualizing our database tier on generic x86 hardware, it lowered hardware costs, improved performance, scalability and maintainability. We now have more redundancy than we had with proprietary hardware.

Ease of upgrades is certainly a strong candidate for improvement. I started looking at an Oracle 12 template and I have to say I liked the Oracle 11 template better, not from a database perspective but from an OS perspective.

We initially implemented version 2.2.1 in 2010 but never took it in to production. We had issues with stability that were ultimately traced to how the LUNs were presented to the guests. We went live with version 3.0 in 2011. We're currently on version 3.2.1.

We've had no issues with deployment.

The stability was a major issue initially and it was traced to how the LUNs were presented to the guests. Once that was resolved, the system was pretty solid.

I did have an issue with the guests running out of swap space and located a procedure to expand swap space without having to disrupt the LUN numbering convention.

It was initially subpar.

It was initially subpar. The issue with LUN presentation was discovered by us and not by tech support. I would think tech support would have been able to at least point us in that direction. Lately, it has been difficult to route issues to the correct group. Once there, however, support has been adequate.

For our database tier, we used proprietary hardware that worked well but we were limited to that type of hardware and it was reaching end-of-life. At the time, Oracle was adamant about their hypervisor being the only one that was license-compliant, so that took us in the direction of Oracle VM. I understand Oracle has backed away from that stance for other hypervisors, but at the time we didn’t want to double or quadruple or database licensing costs.

Unfortunately, I used my VMware experience and applied it to the Oracle VM setup. Looking back, that was probably not the right approach as some things in Oracle VM are very different. The LUN presentation issue came down to poor documentation as there were two ways to present the LUNs and the documentation made it seem the improper method was the way to go.

We did it in-house, but ultimately had to get Oracle involved for the initial implementation. The version we are currently on is very stable. I should probably consider upgrading, but it’s a lower priority task right now.

The ROI was very low considering that the initial license was free.

Support costs are manageable.

As a hypervisor, it is effective, however the functionality is a step down from VMware. Upgrades are getting easier to do, but still not as easy as VMware.

The current versions seem much more stable than the earlier ones. The best advice I have is to understand the documentation and don’t take prior experience with other hypervisors in to account.

A typical database node-guest configuration:

The disks for the O/S and swap are configured as Virtual Disks while the LUNs for ASM are configured as Physical Disks.

The environment was configured primarily to host our PeopleSoft implementation as well as several smaller databases. However, PeopleSoft is being replaced with another ERP solution so this environment will be used for historical purposes. The future of the other databases is yet to be determined.

I use Oracle VM in my company mainly for simple things, not heavy stuff. In general, Oracle VM mainly helps with the monitoring of different servers.

The automatic start of the product to work as a background process has shortcomings and needs improvement. If you restart the machine to implement a feature through auto-start, you should get a tray icon or a service without the need for any additional tuning or scripts.

I have been using Oracle VM for more than three years. I use the solution's latest version. I use the solution on my desktop through Windows. I don't know if Oracle VM has a server version or not.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine or ten out of ten. I am not sure if the problem is in the product itself or the virtual machine.

Around three people use the solution, and our company doesn't plan to increase the solution's usage.

If I have issues with the solution, I read online documents or public forums.

I have experience with VMware ESXi and a bunch of free products, like Linux-based VMs and KVM. I did not switch from any other solutions to Oracle VM. I use Oracle VM for some special use cases.

The product's initial setup phase was simple.

One can deploy the solution by just downloading and installing it.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

The solution can be deployed in less than a minute.

One admin is enough to take care of the deployment and maintenance of the product.

I currently work as a consultant for different IT products, so I take care of the deployment phase by myself.

I have not seen any direct impacts in my company from the use of the solution to be able to see the value that the product offers, maybe because I used it for monitoring purposes only, but it does help me resolve issues quickly.

There is no need to make any payments to use the solution. You can just download the product and use it for free.

I recommend the solution to others as it is a stable solution that works properly.

Considering my use cases, I rate the overall product a nine out of ten.

We are using Oracle VM for containers, developing testing, and Kubernetes.

Oracle VM helps us with the development of proposals.

The Foundation is the most valuable feature of Oracle VM.

The documentation for implementation could be improved because we were not able to find an easy way to implement our company's features due to a lack of understanding.

I am currently using Oracle VM.

Oracle VM is stable.

We previously used VMware. However, I did not have the ability to use VMware in my tech environment. Since we made a contract with Oracle for our database solution and cloud services, we thought that it would be a good idea to try Oracle VM.

The initial setup was straightforward. The deployment took one hour and required three people.

The implementation was completed in-house.

The solution is free but we have to pay for technical support.

We evaluated other solutions but they were all expensive.

I give Oracle VM an eight out of ten.

I suggest signing a contract for the technical support for Oracle VM because it lacks documentation and can be difficult to find information.

The valuable features are the cost and the convenience of the physical machines, meaning that you can have multiple virtual machines that you can use for many other different tools, not just Hyperion. We work with different Oracle products such as EBS, OBIEE, and Hyperion and they're all integrated so we don't have to have different physical servers located in our datacenter. What you can do is create different virtual machines in the same physical server and use that for any of our products.

For example, we are going to upgrade our Oracle BI product, so that needs to have more servers. What we are thinking to do is to create more VM's in the same physical server instead of buying more physical servers. It's just a matter of creating a new virtual machine, which is not a big task for the administration team. Probably within an hour they're able to build up a new server for us, so it's easy, faster and cheaper that way.

Initially, you did not have an option in Oracle VM to build an image and just restore into a different physical or virtual environment, but now the option is included. That's one thing I thought wasn't there and wanted to have, because we are planning to move our Essbase database server from physical to virtual, and I thought it's not going to be easier because you can't just export the physical server and just import everything into the virtual machine. Now the integration is there. You can export the physical server's configuration, their registries and everything, the databases and then just import them to virtual machines. That's the only lacking feature I thought was with VM, but they have included it. 

It still takes some time and the valuations have to be done by the admin, so it still is taking more time. That's, I think, one of the challenges that we recently had when we were talking to our administration team. The Windows and Linux admins took some time, like a couple of days, to build servers for us, which as far as I think being an IT person, it's a virtual machine. Once you have the image it should be easy enough to import it into the new virtual machine, built up like a snapshot. 

I think they could make the implementation faster. It's still taking some time, which should be eliminated in the future, I think, and it will be because I've seen a lot of improvement already.

If deployment could be more faster, that would good, but right now it's fine. It solved my problem of migrating from physical to virtual, so initially I had to reinstall Essbase and it's a big challenge in the Linux machine.

I haven't seen any big issue with the stability. There have been no issues with instability that I've seen.

It's been able to scale for our needs.

Within one day, we had migrated a physical to virtual server and then we had a database working, and it was like seamless transition. We just changed the alias of that machine to whatever the listing server alias name was, and the application picked up right away.

We implemented it with our in-house team.

I looked into vSphere and Hyper-V, and then decided that we could not go with any other non-Oracle virtual technology. It had to be Oracle VM, so that's one thing I wanted to make sure was that we had Oracle VM as a new server, otherwise Hyperion is not going to be supported on non-Oracle virtual servers.

For us, the biggest thing I think is the compatibility with all the other Oracle products. We have ERP and EPM and all these reporting tools like BI. The most important factor for us is when you talk about the compatibility of all these different products, it has to have compatibility with dependent operating systems, the servers, the database, Internet Explorer browsers, Java, and all those different tools that are integrated in our system.

If we go with any other virtual servers or virtual products, let's say VMware, it is compatible but it's not 100% guaranteed that we'll be supported by Oracle support. Let's say in the future if we have a problem, Oracle support might say we are not able to support because you are using third-party tools. That's the most important factor and advantage over other tools in the market available when we choose to go with Oracle.

We just did the upgrade of our Oracle Hyperion, so one thing I learned is we could not go with any other tool because we have all these Oracle products integrated tightly and we cannot just install them on some other non-Oracle products. I think we are also talking about to move from physical to virtual for one of our Essbase databases. Right now it's on Essbase, which is under Hyperion, on a physical server, so again, just to take advantage of the cost and the recovery and the disaster recovery and all those benefits that virtual machine has to offer.

Prepare for the development time and the allocation of resources. That's the key thing. When you're building an image or a Oracle VM server, how much resources are you allocating? Let's say for example, the storage and buffer memory and the processor speed for each of your instance for that physical server capable of 100 gigabyte of memory, and then you're trying to build 10 servers out of it that are virtual servers. You need to analyze and review, out of those 10 servers, which server needs more resource and more hard space based on your application growth. That is the key thing that I've seen. Some admins don't pay attention when they're building the package. It really depends on the factor of what tool is going to be implemented on what server. How much space and how much processor speed is it going to need?

For example, the Essbase database in Hyperion needs a lot of memory and processing speed. It needs more threads to calculate the data, so for that you need to allocate as much resources as you can as compared to maybe other tools which don't need that much of resources.

Planning to build your package for your client for the virtual machine on the physical server is the key thing.

The solution is a suite of products so it depends on the needs of the client. 

Depending on which product specifically is being used for this solution there are different features. If we're running Oracle VM for SPARC, it has line migration capabilities, and performance, and can use hardware virtualization on network cards.

The solution is an outdated Xen-based application. They only perform maintenance support for it. The new version is Oracle Linux Virtualization, which is a re-skinned version of the over stack, basically the same as the one that Red Hat sells. They could harmonize management between their products better.

I have been working with Oracle's Virtualization for ten to fifteen years.

The stability is rock solid. We have a fairly large technical company running the solution on their production database which is used by the production machines to collect information. If the database is down, the production stops. There has not been a stop in the production for over three years.

The cloud appliance is easy to scale because it's built to scale. You just add a new machine into them and then it will automatically boot and install. The other solutions are easy to scale as long as they are set up correctly from the beginning. They require a shared file system, either NFS, the cluster file system, glossary, or something similar to that. That will allow you to scale your storage, and then scale the compute nodes. Basically, install Oracle Linux and a node then point the management to it and say, "This is your new compute node for you."

I have used the solutions customer service plenty of times. In most cases, the support is pretty good. They have knowledgeable people working for them.

Positive

It depends on if you are setting up a simple environment or a more complex one where you have to look at the Fiber Channel storage, high availability, and things like that. If you are looking at setting up a complex multi-site cluster of Oracle VM for SPARC, it is not easy. You have all of the clustering parts, multi-site parts, storage, and networking that come with the setup. It is still easier to set up these systems now compared to back when you had bare-bone systems and had to do everything yourself.

The implementation was done in-house.

The solution as a standalone product can not be purchased. When you purchase the hardware such as Oracle X36, and the support cost for the hardware, you get the support for the operating system and the virtualization stack included. It is part of either operating systemized on the Linux side or over on the slower side. I give the cost a seven out of ten.

I have evaluated several options such as Proxmox, Red Hat, and Overt. They all do the same things but in different ways. They all have similar feature sets. The interfaces have their own quirks. All of the options are fairly equal with some differences.

My personal favorite VM solution is Proxmox. It is a lower-cost solution, easy to install, and I also run it on my home system.

Our clients primarily use Oracle VM for test databases, web, and application services. It serves as a versatile tool in our top solutions.

The platform's most valuable feature is that it is free of charge. It is a stable product that has been reliable for several years. Its remote solution, live migration of VMs, and integration capabilities are also noteworthy.

The product could improve network virtualization and hardware utilization functionalities.

We have been using Oracle VM for about two years.

The solution is stable, but there can be performance issues, particularly with network cards and device registration. Expanding storage can also be problematic. However, these issues can be managed effectively with proper knowledge and maintenance.

The solution is scalable. You can add servers to the cluster and integrate them into the existing system without major issues. The process is straightforward if you are familiar with the system.

We use the free version of Oracle VM, which does not include direct support. However, it provides sufficient documentation and resources on its website. It has adequately maintained our systems since our use is not critical.

Previously, we used VM from Red Hat, but we switched to Oracle VM because it is a newer type of virtualization OEM and is quite stable. It is a free product, which is a significant advantage for us. While it may not be as suitable for critical systems, it is useful for non-critical applications.

The initial setup is easy. The installation guide and knowledge base provided by Oracle are useful. We can find all the necessary information for deployment if we do not require support. 

The deployment time depends on the complexity of the setup. A standard deployment involving one machine and one storage unit takes about one day. We require two engineers: one for initial equipment setup and another for system deployment and configuration.

Oracle VM offers features such as live migration of VMs, remote solutions, online memory expansion, and integration with various systems. Despite some issues with network virtualization and hardware performance, these functionalities make it a good solution for many use cases.

I rate it a seven out of ten. 

We use it for the integration part, as a jump host, or to create an ABS VM for lift and shift. That's what we use it for.

I'm just involved in providing VMs; application testing and development are handled by a different department.

The security is robust; it's encrypted. If you have a VM running on a private subnet, then it's highly secure, which is what everyone prefers with Oracle. 

If you want to access the VM from anywhere over the Internet, you put it in a public subnet. So, VMs are linked to that. The subnets are linked to it. So, it's perfectly secured if it's a private network. The security is set.

Integration capabilities are a little complicated. It could be made easier. Whether integrating with Azure or other platforms or integration with OIC itself, the integration part is a little complicated. The integration console could also be made a bit more user-friendly.

Sometimes, the API calls and procedures are a bit complicated. Not everyone is familiar with the systems and how to work with them, but a little easier steps would do better.

The console is clear, but the integration side of it, sometimes, the Oracle Cloud doesn't have an IDCS user. Normally, in the integration of Oracle Identity Cloud Service (IDCS), it is useless. But now there's no Oracle Identity and Access Management (IAM) IDCS because it's been compressed to domain-based. So, it's domain-based right now. There's no ID here. Everyone has access, depending on the policy and access. 

However, in specific environments, like GovCloud, there need to be more upgrades. Maybe it's because it's GovCloud; it's like that. However, the integration part becomes a little complicated in terms of the GovCloud log, where we have to make adjustments. There are no IDCS users, so we need to put in an IAM user and implement the policies. The integration of the VM agent and connectivity agent becomes a little complicated.

I have been using it for two years. 

It is stable. But in some cases, the connectivity to the service gateways is a little complicated to the SaaS cloud. We have that difficulty. Oracle is working on that.

It's highly scalable. You can scale up and scale down, both vertically and horizontally. So, those are good features. 

The customer service and support are good. 

Positive

I've been working with Azure recently, so I started learning it. It's just like creating a VM, creating users, and setting passwords for them.

Oracle is entirely on a Linux platform. Very rarely Windows is used unless it's a Jump host or for IDP sessions. But Azure is completely Windows-based. So, we need to switch over and switch on to using Linux commands. That's the major difference. 

The initial setup is complex. We need to configure the integration on the console. We need to install that connectivity agent to a VM. And the whole process is a little complicated. Where it could be made a little easier, the API could be a bit easier where  OAuth tokens and everything generated is a bit more straightforward.

The whole process from the beginning will take around two days. For deployment and maintenance, two people are enough.

The user will be charged accordingly as well—pay as you go. So, that's also a feature that comes with Oracle.

Basically, you get charged only for storage. If I stop a VM, then I'm not charged for the CPU usage. So, that's fine.

The pricing is cheap. The charge is around $20 to $ 30 per day for that.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.

The only recommendation is, in case you lose the keys for the VMs, that becomes a little complicated process to get through. There is a process, but unless the person is very technically sound, the keys cannot be exchanged or checked. They cannot be retrieved, but they can be changed.

That's the only point you need to remember.

Live migrations work as advertised and, if set right, it moves VMs around to balance out the resources.

Development of the product seems slow, but then again, I do not want a rushed product. Oracle states that this is their solution for their products, but Windows is fully supported. It may not have all the features of VMware, but those features come at a cost (monetarily and performance-wise). I want a rock solid foundation, and I don't want a bunch of hooks into the foundation of my Windows infrastructure.

The system we set up has two nodes (hosts) and one manager. We are using an HP DL 380 for the manager and 385s for the hosts, which, at the time, were not on the compatibility list, but it still works.

We have most of our Windows domain on OVM. One host has one domain controller, the other host has another domain controller. So just in case we lose a host, we do not loose an authentication server.

We had problems with the PV drivers setting CPUs above eight, but this limitation is noted in the ReadMe file.

Once the system was up and running, the VMs ran great! We have Windows 2003, 2008 and 2008R2 servers. At the time, in July 2013, 2012 was not supported.

We've had no issues scaling it for our needs.

I was using Oracle OEM and Dell Foglight on virtual machines that were already on the market. When Oracle came with its own VM product that was better suited to an Oracle environment and easy to use with Oracle builds, we switched.

I set up the manager first. Since this is an Oracle installation, I chose to install the manager software on Oracle Linux 6.1. Nothing fancy needed, but I installed the desktop to make things easier for me. I have two NICs set up, one to connect to my network, and the other to connect to the hosts (for management, VM live migrations, and the heartbeat). I then installed the manager software and you just need to click Next>Next>Next. Be sure to write the password down, as this is the password needed to gain access to the management console (via web).

The hosts were a snap. We do not have any hard drives in the host, but do have a flash card to boot from. So I chose the "minimal" install for the flash card install, and you need to set a root password and a discover password. Make note of them as you will need the discover password to make the connection in the manager. Keep the discover password the same for all hosts to make it easier. Once in the manager, before you discover all the hosts you need to manage, you will need to set what the VLANs are, bonds to the network, how many virtual NICs you will need, etc. After you discover the nodes, you will need to set up a pool repository that keeps all the info on the VMs. This repository should go on the SAN. Another repository should be set up for all your ISOs and other VM volumes if you chose not to use raw LUNs. Connect all the storage you will use (we have HP P4300s). We use all raw iSCSI LUNS for our VMs. We lose some functionality in OVM, but gain others via the SAN (snapshots, etc).

You get enterprise features for no cost or low cost if you chose to purchase support.

Do not attempt to run OVM on old hardware as it only runs on 64-bit systems. Check with the hardware compatibility guide for more details.

This is a great solution and, in my opinion, it's a rare jewel that more Windows shops should be looking at.