top | item 46997620

(no title)

anurag | 18 days ago

This is a big deal because you can now run Firecracker/other microVMs in an AWS VM instead of expensive AWS bare-metal instances.

GCP has had nested virtualization for a while.

discuss

order

direwolf20|18 days ago

You can use an expensive AWS VM instead of an expensive AWS bare–metal image. Does anyone realise how expensive AWS is, even in the best case?

PunchyHamster|18 days ago

It is expensive. But the point where it stops being expensive is far above most companies use case. If you're paying less than a developers salary for hosting you most likely won't see all that many benefits from moving.

Renting a server from cheaper hosting providers can be massive savings but you now need to re-invent all of the AWS APIs you use or might use and it's big CAPEX time investment. And any new feature you need, whether that's queue, mail gateway or thousand other APIs need to be deployed and managed first before you can even start testing.

It's less work now than it was before just due to amount of tools there are to automate it but it's still more work that you could be spending on improving your product.

Twirrim|18 days ago

OCI supports it with Intel. I know it works with AMD, but we don't officially support that so far as I'm aware. The performance hit on AMD is bigger than Intel, last I looked.

iJohnDoe|18 days ago

Was hoping this comment would be here. Firecracker and microVMs are good use-case. Also, being able to simply test and develop is a nice to have.

Nested virtualization can mean a lot of things. Not just full VMs.

HumanOstrich|18 days ago

> Firecracker and microVMs are good use-case.

Good use-case for what?

parhamn|18 days ago

whats the ~ perf hit of something like this?

largbae|18 days ago

Nowadays nested just wastes the extra operating system overhead and I/O performance if your VM doesn't have paravirtualization drivers installed. CPUs all have hardware support.

otterley|18 days ago

As a practical matter, anywhere from 5-15%.