RHEV Reviews

The primary use of this solution is to implement ERP. If you want to have multiple servers on the same machine or if you do not require multiple machines it supports kernel-based virtual machines.

The solution is overall very good with all the facilities. It is user friendly, easy to configure, has documentation, and support is available. 

Customers are not aware of this solution, they can improve by providing more awareness and solution availability. The technical features are okay right now for our requirements, but of course, with technology, there are areas for improvement.

Additionally, there should be more integration with other platforms. 

I have used it for a couple of years.

It is a very stable solution.

The solution is scalable.

It has good support, but we did not require to use it much.

The installation was easy. The time was affected by configuration requirements and the extent of work needed for customization. For example, the simplicity or complexity of it, how many virtual machines we want to establish, or whether we want MDM.

We normally use approximately 35 people to implement the solution.

The solution does not require licencing but a subscription is necessary, which is very affordable.

I would recommend this solution to other users.

I rate RHEV a nine out of ten. 

We have been using RHEV in both on-premises and cloud deployments for testing.

In my team, we don't have access to a paid version of Red Hat. Instead, we mostly use CentOS and Ubuntu.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the support portal.

Configuring the network interfaces is much better in Ubuntu and should be improved. I find this to be the biggest problem. In Ubunto they have the idea of the Netplan, which is much better than the facility in Red Hat.

I have been using RHEV for about five months.

I have seen some bugs that I fixed on my own.

We have not had to scale this solution because it is not for everyday use. Rather, we use it for testing purposes.

Technical support for RHEV is very fast and good. 

We use different versions of Linux including CentOS and Ubuntu. CentOS is very comparable to Red Hat because it is almost the same, internally.

In the beginning, the initial setup was quite complex. However, once you get used to it, I would say that the setup is of normal difficulty and not a problem.

I implemented this solution with the assistance of my colleague.

We are using the free version of Red Hat.

RHEV is a good solution and I would rate it a nine out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is for making DNS, website work, DHCP, and other security functions like ID tables and other tools.

The Administration of the Oracle database and the SAP ERP needs improvement.

In the next release. I would like to see some additional features to make it easier, such as improvements to the GUI and the maintenance. The maintenance of Red Hat is difficult.

Red Hat is the most stable system. It's better than other OS solutions.

At first, this solution was deployed on-premises, then I converted it to cloud using VMware tools to make our private cloud on our data center.

This is an open-source solution.

I have always recommended using other platforms versus Windows. I didn't like using any Windows system, Microsoft system or any system with heavy traffic like ERP and Websites.

I recommend Linux.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

The solution is a great all-round product. The virtualization is especially good. 

The GUI interface needs improvement. Not 90%, but 50% or 60% of the work is done from the command line and so on, so the GUI needs work because people are looking for an easier way to manage the environment. Right now, if someone is not very familiar with Red Hat and actually is looking to add Red Hat to the environment, they have to take some training. It needs to be easier to use.

The solution could use network virtualization.

The stability is very good. We've had very good feedback on it.

The solution is very scalable.

The technical support is very good.

The initial setup can be a bit complex, but it depends on the deployment itself.

We are resellers of Red Hat. We deal with various deployment models, however, we generally deal with on-premises.

I would recommend the solution. Of course, it depends on what an organization is looking for in terms of virtualization.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

The Ovirt component has flexibility, and is easy to perform integration within a  heterogenous data centre manager with OpenStack or ManageIQ.

It has the possibility to OEM and create a great product with Ovirt as the main component.

It needs a better administrator KB, similar to what Citrix XenDesktop has. Also, they don't know how to sell their great products and don’t really seems to be interested in taking care of their partners who trust and really know their products.

If you have a heterogenous data centre that is specially focused on Linux platforms, this is safe money, and good if you are looking for automation. 

It also offers great integration with DevOps tools.

For any application that requires 100% uptime, 100% of data accessibility, I use these servers. 

Within our organization, there are roughly 100 employees using this solution.

This solution could be more secure. Also, the CPU power could be increased.

I have been using this solution since the very beginning — about eight or nine years.

This solution is very stable. Much more so than similar products.

It's more of an availability solution than a scalable solution.

The initial setup is very easy. Installation takes no longer than one hour.

I installed this solution by myself.

We have to pay extra for vulnerability and fault tolerance.

I would absolutely recommend this solution to others. Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of nine.

There is no other server equivalent to this one available on the market at the moment. Not HP, not IBM, and not Dell.