VPS Management Panel

[Phil Davis]

How far does it matters to provide a vps management panel with KVM?

If so , which would be the best , virtualizor or solusvm2

 

[SharedGrid]

Neither of those - VirtFusion is the best!

A VPS management panel matters though, maybe not from a admin administration point of view but from a customer point of view. The customers require something that is pleasant on the eye and lets them do everything they need at the click of a button.

 

[Phil Davis]

Thanks for that !

Yeah , from client's point of view , its must that they have a panel.

 

[Phil Davis]

Neither of those - VirtFusion is the best!

A VPS management panel matters though, maybe not from a admin administration point of view but from a customer point of view. The customers require something that is pleasant on the eye and lets them do everything they need at the click of a button.

There are no direct docs / links for installation of virtfusion , specifically to be installed on almalinux 8 and above.Plus i guess there needs further network configuration as well.

 

[SharedGrid]

There are no direct docs / links for installation of virtfusion , specifically to be installed on almalinux 8 and above.Plus i guess there needs further network configuration as well.

It's well documented here: https://docs.virtfusion.com/installation/control-server

AlmaLinux is a derivative of RHEL, therefore you'll need the RHEL commands.

 

[Phil Davis]

Thanks for that 🙂

 

[asiadev]

Yes, I also support the choice of using VirtFusion. I've already tried it—it's very lightweight and has a clear UI. This is very much liked by many clients.

 

[webmaster.services]

as many have said here - definitely support the virtfusion , also isn't super expensive and super resource light

 

[Deepesh21]

For simple management, the virtualizer is suitable; it has more features, is mature, and better suited for VPS with KVM. For personal use, solusvem it has a user interface, KVM-focused and simpler to use, but comes with fewer features.

 

[AfinaG]

Without a control panel, administering KVM - creating VMs, handling networking, storage, and snapshots - requires more manual steps and tooling (virsh, libvirt XML configs, etc.). A panel streamlines tasks like provisioning, templates, resource allocation, user permissions, billing integration, and basic monitoring. For teams that need frequent VM deployment, automated rebuilds, quota management, and delegated access, a panel pays off in time saved and fewer mistakes.

 

[Oboebeeolive]

Some legacy systems and bespoke infrastructures were built around Xen tooling and drivers. For these setups, migrating to KVM could require substantial changes - so sticking with Xen is easier and safer. Xen still has valid, practical use cases - especially where stability, strong isolation, paravirtualized efficiency, or legacy compatibility matter.