Proxmox VE Reviews

We primarily use the solution in order to have an infrastructure set up on-prem. It enables flexibility in projects to set up virtual servers. Instead of having to go out and buy expensive solutions from VMware, for example, Proxmox fills the gap between flexibility and stability. 

The solution is easy to install. It can run on a lot of different types of hardware. Creating virtual machines with it is really easy. 

The backup solution is a little bit slow and sometimes sluggish on the restore side. It takes a little bit of time, but that could also be the fault of the hardware.

We had some challenges with management including volume and storage management. Setting it up properly and making it work, specifically shared storage between the virtual machines, is difficult.

The installation could definitely be easier. For the vendor, if the solution offered better information, they would have more users on it.

The solution should implement something that enables me to at least get an overview of the loads and the statuses of the machines and applications from my cell phone. An app for mobile management would be great.

It's been very stable. It's been working tremendously for our projects in order to set up things temporarily. Right now, it's not in production; we're only using it for testing. It offers superb stability, however.

We haven't tried to scale the solution. We tried it with two loads, which isn't really enough for a scalability test. We only have about 20 people on the solution currently.

We haven't really used technical support. We've only been using the community version.

We previously used VMware. We switched mostly due to the cost, but also the scalability, and usability of Proxmox.

The initial setup, after you've done it once, is straightforward, but the first time it isn't. That's because of the way you build the image. When you install on x86 infrastructure, mounting the installation is not straightforward. Unless you have medium to good NAVIS experience, it's actually difficult to install. 

We handled the implementation ourselves. The documentation available is really good, which is why we were able to handle it internally.

We use the on-premises deployment model.

Apart from a few small issues, everything works well in comparison to VMware. I would select Proxmox any day. The solution itself is really good.

The solution should definitely keep supporting the community, and always have a community edition because people who are interested in it will want to learn it. Once users get into production mode, they will definitely end up buying the support version. They should make the implementation easier, however, because then the solution would get more people on board.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for some websites and applications.

The solution allows for easy integrations.

The solution needs a better billing system.

The solution is stable.

We buy support from Proxmox.

We currently use a mix of solutions, so we haven't just switched from one to another. We also use VMware and OpenStack.

The initial setup was complex. We took about a month to fully deploy the solution.

We handled the implementation ourselves.

The solution isn't expensive. It's cheap for us.

We use the hybrid cloud deployment model.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

My primary use case for this solution is virtualization.

We have an on-premises deployment.

The most valuable feature of this solution is performance. It is fast.

I would like to see more monitoring in the next release of this solution. Currently, it's simple structured monitoring.

This is a stable solution.

This is a scalable solution. It recognizes memory, so if you add a new hard disk then it is ok.

We have two people who use this solution.

I have never contacted technical support for this solution. I've found everything that I needed to know on the internet.

The initial setup of this solution is straightforward, and it is relatively easy to set up.

I performed the implementation myself.

We do not require any staff for deployment and maintenance. It works right out of the box.

This is a solution that I recommend.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

Our primary use case is testing any software by Proxmox.

The solution's compatibility is very good with multiple operating systems. The moving systems are very good and migration is excellent. These are the most valuable features for us.

The solution should include some features that can help with converting raw files into different formats. It should offer better management around raw files.

The stability of the solution is very good.

The solution is scalable.

I've never been in touch with technical support so I can't speak to any direct experience with them. Their website, however, is very helpful.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We use the standard community edition of the solution. We use the on-premises deployment model.

The planning of the volumes is very important because if you're converting from one format to another, you can have some challenges there. I would advise others to plan the setup very, very well so that you do not have to migrate systems into different formats. That's the only challenge that we had.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I use this solution as a virtualization and Linux container platform for a small-medium Enterprise. It's highly stable, flexible, expansible, and compatible. The characteristics of the software combined with the hardware performance allow for the deployment of services in many different and variable scenarios, especially on-site for companies that need this kind of deployment.

Proxmox allows us to achieve affordable performance while keeping high levels of data protection and flexibility. It also enables the deployment of services for small enterprises that need on-site deployment, and at the same time, it helps keep the budget under control. It maintains very low energy, noise, and steric footprint for the office environment.

For me, there are several features that I find valuable, including:

• Use of open-source software.
• Compatibility with simple Linux container solutions on the same hosts.
• The integration of a simple and flexible backup solution.
• The dashboard/control panel.

Worthy of special mention is the community, which is excellent at solving or explaining difficulties for the users of the solution.

This solution needs a more flexible and efficient backup solution in the dashboard.

The capacity for integrating deployment through WAN is needed. Something like a Federation tool for Central monitoring and management.

UPS supervision integration would be a nice feature because right now this has been integrated by ourselves using another tool that is not on the platform.

Besides using the free unlicensed version, the updates are very stable. I have only had one reported incident in eight years. Systems are deployed in office scenarios.

This solution scales relatively easily.

I have never used the technical support. Instead, I have relied on the community.

Prior to this solution, I used VMware VSphere 5 and 6, but it requires mostly professional (certified) IT equipment. The performance impact of the hypervisor and control panel is very heavy and it requires an independent backup solution. It also does not support Linux containers.

The initial setup was relatively simple. We had a couple of servers and an iSCSI SAN, VLAN, and LACP Bonding with no HA.

We performed the implementation in-house.

The time it took for us to see the ROI was very short.

Proxmox is free software, but if you prefer the support and a more rested repository then you can pay for it.

I evaluated several products including Docker, HyperV, VirtualBox, and KVM.

We currently have more than 160 virtual machines and LXC containers on Proxmox in an all Linux production environment.  

Get the community level if you are on a budget --- keep your software updated to the latest releases.

Live migration. It is easier to balance loads across hypervisors if a given container or virtual machine uses more resources than its peers.

IMPORTANT - use separate physical network for Corosync/Heartbeat functions. This is obscure in the documentation - but you'll find it.

Heartbeat was overwhelmed due to all hypervisors running a single NIC - nodes started to fence themselves when load was high.

Use best practices for network segregation - management / heartbeat / live migration / Ethernet-based storage should be on different networks (VLANs).

N/A.

Very straightforward.

In-House.

The cost is excellent. An excellent choice for budget sensitive operations.

I needed a free virtualization solution for training, development work, and application testing with the ability to quickly deploy VMs based on a single VM template and snapshots.

By implementing Proxmox, we now have the ability to quickly build and deploy VM desktops for application testing with the snapshot ability to rollback, as required. Saves a lot of time compared to imaging physical desktops. The web interface is quick to learn for techs to deploy VMs based on templates, as required.

The template option allows us to build a desktop in a VM, then quickly deploy as a linked clone. The hard drive file on the template is used (read-only), then all changes are saved in a separate hard drive file. It is like deploying a new VM based on snapshots.

Some of the more advanced features and options required for setup still need to use the console and hand edit config files.

No issues.

No issues.

initial setup was a bit of a learning curve, as with any new product. Some of the configuration required uses the console and options were not available in web interface (like setting MTU on NICs).

It's a solid, stable and powerful open source virtualisation product that has allowed us to bring virtualisation to smaller SMBs at an affordable price.

All our client servers are now virtualised, which has reduced the risk of downtime due to a server failure that used to happen with non-virtualised servers. Servers can be backed up using snapshots etc.

Storage IO management seems the weakest link although this could be hardware related. On decent servers this is not an issue but on smaller custom built servers we have occasionally had issues with IO speed. It is a well thought out product and the newer versions just seem to get better n better.

We've been using it for seven years.

There have been no issues deploying it.

There have been no issues with its stability.

We haven't had any issues scaling it for our needs.

I've never really needed it as I've been able to work out most things intuitively.

We also looked at VMware. Our perception is that this is a superior product but that is subjective as it is not mainstream.

It's straightforward. We have developed a tried and tested method to set up servers and it works well once you know how you want your servers to work.

It's hard to quantity but using Proxmox has significantly boosted our server capabilities and service offering increasing our revenue.

It's open source and provided one has enough experience with Linux and servers it doesn’t cost much other than time to become an expert in the product.

We also looked at VMware.

It's well worth using. It's highly recommended and we have had no issues.