Virtualizor updates gives VPS Providers grey hair and sleep deprevation

mikho

Yet again, a Virtualizor **PATCH ** created issues for us VPS Providers.

Not sure of my intentions of this open thread, more than a rant about the frustration on how this is managed.

Don't get me wrong, I love Virtualizor for their will to implement new features and trying to be in the forefront as a panel to manage virtual servers.

At the same time, this is what gives me grey hairs and unnecessary tickets with time spent on keeping water from flooding the life-boat instead of focusing on other things that also need my attention.

I am, a consultant by heart and mind, sometimes I compare myself to the likes of a prostitute, I sell my services for money.
Every time this type of thing happens, I have to spend my time fixing or at least working around a problem that someone else caused.
So instead of helping a customer and making money, I have to spend my time on something else that in the end, cost me money.

No, I'm not losing billions every time it happens but it wears me down. I don't know how many times I've looked at competitors for managing my virtual servers, but what I would gain in product stability, I would lose in features.

I've even considered building my own panel, and I did pay a developer to start. Due to reasons, that development has stopped and I ended up with nothing.

@Virtualizor : PLEASE, stop adding features to PATCH releases.
Make a proper release strategy, where PATCH means PATCH.

Change the auto-update system to only include bugfixes.
When releasing feature updates, make it mandatory that the admin has to apply the update by clicking on a button och checking an agreement box.

ALSO, better notifications when updates are applied to the WHMCS module.
It has happened in the past that the date on the website wasn't updated when an updated version was available. And use proper software versioning on the module.
Don't apply patches to the same software version.

This is all written with a lot of emotions, but I had to write something, to release some of the tension going on.

Live long and prosper, I might not

chirag

Hi,

Sir sorry for the inconvenience caused.
We have released the patch in release for this issue within 24 hours. And for stable in next half an hour it will be released.

MichaelCee

Yeah. The people at Virtualizor are lovely, but I'm sure there are more practical ways for them to go forward.

InceptionHosting

@chirag said:
Hi,

Sir sorry for the inconvenience caused.
We have released the patch in release for this issue within 24 hours. And for stable in next half an hour it will be released.

@chirag people have been publicly complaining about this forced update system causing issues problem for at least 6 years that I know of, why is softaculous and by extension virtualizor completely incapable of learning lessons?

This is such a simple problem to resolve, you need to admit that your "stable" branch is actually beta at best, change the name of stable to beta and have a true stable path that is at LEAST 3 months behind what you now call stable.

I have to tell you that the only people that consider virtualizor stable as actually stable is virtualizor and you are not the ones suffering any real consequences for being wrong, I say no consequences but in reality this a large part of the reason you have not gained the same market share as solusvm, it is not about the price, your UI is a confusing mess for admins (the people that pay you) and your forced rolling updates rarely fail to cause issues and you are 100% incapable of taking feedback surrounding the bigger picture and still focus on features over all else.

Why won't you listen? honestly, I think by now everyone wants a straight forward answer, you can only either be ignoring the problems you know you cause or there is a massive technical issue with virtualizor that prevents you using any worthwhile version control?

It has to be one of those 2 options because the only other is that the person signing off the releases is incredibly incompetent and has kept their job for years despite this which is just unlikely to be the case as that would mean the person at the very top is also willfully ignorant and/or incompetent.

I really do not know why you guys will not listen, I really don't, you seem to be reasonable when I have spoken with you in the past but this continued head in the sand is literally damaging your business and any idiot can see that from the outside looking in.

mikho

@chirag said:
Hi,

Sir sorry for the inconvenience caused.
We have released the patch in release for this issue within 24 hours. And for stable in next half an hour it will be released.

this might sound harsh but if you want me to do your testing, I want enough licenses to be able to run a proper stage environment.

InceptionHosting

@mikho said:

@chirag said:
Hi,

Sir sorry for the inconvenience caused.
We have released the patch in release for this issue within 24 hours. And for stable in next half an hour it will be released.

this might sound harsh but if you want me to do your testing, I want enough licenses to be able to run a proper stage environment.

That stopped sounding harsh, 6 years ago after the 10th time this sort of thing happened. it has GOT to be in the 100's now.

chirag

Hi,

Sir in past we considered the users request and we try to provide the fixes as soon as possible.
We will get more details from user as we are creating feature request portal and as per that we will prioritize the patches as well.
We have released the patch for this.
Again sorry for the inconvenience caused.

InceptionHosting

@chirag said:
Hi,

Sir in past we considered the users request and we try to provide the fixes as soon as possible.
We will get more details from user as we are creating feature request portal and as per that we will prioritize the patches as well.
We have released the patch for this.
Again sorry for the inconvenience caused.

You have been saying that for 6 years.

cybertech

seems virtualizor need to get properly burned by amaterasu before anything is fixed

Brueggus

I wish providers would be able to enable IPv6 for my VPS again without opening a ticket with Virtualizor. :'(

chirag

Hi,

Sir we have made the branching system.
We first release the version in release candidate and after 2 weeks we make it stable.
If we get any issues in that from users we immediately release the patch for release branch.

mikho

@chirag said:
Hi,

Sir we have made the branching system.
We first release the version in release candidate and after 2 weeks we make it stable.
If we get any issues in that from users we immediately release the patch for release branch.

Will you stop adding new features to the PATCH releases?

chirag

Hi,

Sir ok, we will not add any new features to the patches from now on.
It will be purely bug fixes.

Freek

@chirag said:
Hi,

Sir ok, we will not add any new features to the patches from now on.
It will be purely bug fixes.

Well that was easy.

InceptionHosting

@Freek said:

@chirag said:
Hi,

Sir ok, we will not add any new features to the patches from now on.
It will be purely bug fixes.

Well that was easy.

Again, all been said before over the years, it will not happen and if it does it will not last.

2 weeks in your testing/experimental branch (which no one is stupid enough to run in production and you guys are as shit are not testing) before forced into stable? how about you just actually listen and stop imposing updates altogether, allow your paying customers to decide when it is stable and let them roll back when it is not.

I appreciate there is a point when you need people on a minimum version, that is not 2 weeks, who do you think you are Archlinux?

ehab

hey @AnthonySmith make him an offer and it take over? i know @mikho knows some parts of the code.

InceptionHosting

@ehab said:
hey @AnthonySmith make him an offer and it take over? i know @mikho knows some parts of the code.

I can think of better ways to spend money, for example:

^ also more stable.

ehab

ok, now know how much you are pissed. then mikho time to move away.

Neoon

Virtualizor did break IPv6 on microLXC already a dozen of times, so piss.

angstrom

It sounds like a rolling-release model -- what fun

Neoon

@angstrom said:
It sounds like a rolling-release model -- what fun

As LONG you dont push that forbidden button called RESTART or STOP inside that said Panel or the Provider reboots the node.
You are fine, but if you do that, you are joining a round of russian roulette, you don't know what will hit you.

Freek

@AnthonySmith said:

@Freek said:

@chirag said:
Hi,

Sir ok, we will not add any new features to the patches from now on.
It will be purely bug fixes.

Well that was easy.

Again, all been said before over the years, it will not happen and if it does it will not last.

2 weeks in your testing/experimental branch (which no one is stupid enough to run in production and you guys are as shit are not testing) before forced into stable? how about you just actually listen and stop imposing updates altogether, allow your paying customers to decide when it is stable and let them roll back when it is not.

I appreciate there is a point when you need people on a minimum version, that is not 2 weeks, who do you think you are Archlinux?

I was being sarcastic, I see I forgot the /s in my post

InceptionHosting

@Freek said:

@AnthonySmith said:

@Freek said:

@chirag said:
Hi,

Sir ok, we will not add any new features to the patches from now on.
It will be purely bug fixes.

Well that was easy.

Again, all been said before over the years, it will not happen and if it does it will not last.

2 weeks in your testing/experimental branch (which no one is stupid enough to run in production and you guys are as shit are not testing) before forced into stable? how about you just actually listen and stop imposing updates altogether, allow your paying customers to decide when it is stable and let them roll back when it is not.

I appreciate there is a point when you need people on a minimum version, that is not 2 weeks, who do you think you are Archlinux?

I was being sarcastic, I see I forgot the /s in my post

lol sorry you must have left the /s in your beta branch.

seriesn

@chirag said:
Hi,

Sir ok, we will not add any new features to the patches from now on.
It will be purely bug fixes.

Hey Bud,
Nice to have you here .

Since you are here, quick question, what’s the eta for ebtables to properly work with IPV6?

Please don’t respond using the word sir and I will love you extra.

InceptionHosting

@seriesn said: Please don’t respond using the word sir and I will love you extra

Those words are music to my ears.

mikho

@seriesn said:

@chirag said:
Hi,

Sir ok, we will not add any new features to the patches from now on.
It will be purely bug fixes.

Hey Bud,
Nice to have you here .

Since you are here, quick question, what’s the eta for ebtables to properly work with IPV6?

Please don’t respond using the word sir and I will love you extra.

Oh, the "must disable ebtables on a KVM to make IPv6 work properly" bug ...

EDIT: forgot the /s ...

InceptionHosting

@mikho said:

@seriesn said:

@chirag said:
Hi,

Sir ok, we will not add any new features to the patches from now on.
It will be purely bug fixes.

Hey Bud,
Nice to have you here .

Since you are here, quick question, what’s the eta for ebtables to properly work with IPV6?

Please don’t respond using the word sir and I will love you extra.

Oh, the "must disable ebtables on a KVM to make IPv6 work properly" bug ...

EDIT: forgot the /s ...

That brand new bug that was reported in 2014?

seriesn

@AnthonySmith said:

@seriesn said: Please don’t respond using the word sir and I will love you extra

Those words are music to my ears.

Yes My British Sir.

InceptionHosting

@seriesn said: Yes My British Sir.

So cringy

Neoon

@AnthonySmith said:

@mikho said:

@seriesn said:

@chirag said:
Hi,

Sir ok, we will not add any new features to the patches from now on.
It will be purely bug fixes.

Hey Bud,
Nice to have you here .

Since you are here, quick question, what’s the eta for ebtables to properly work with IPV6?

Please don’t respond using the word sir and I will love you extra.

Oh, the "must disable ebtables on a KVM to make IPv6 work properly" bug ...

EDIT: forgot the /s ...

That brand new bug that was reported in 2014?

You need to take a look at the docker page, I had my fun on the iPv6 bugs.

seriesn

Btw, thank you for the quick fix. Despite all the negative stuff, I do have to add that, Virtualizor support quality improved a lot vs the past.

mikho

@seriesn said:
Btw, thank you for the quick fix. Despite all the negative stuff, I do have to add that, Virtualizor support quality improved a lot vs the past.

As I said in the original post, I like the product, only wish that some things were handled differently (read better).

seriesn

@mikho said:

@seriesn said:
Btw, thank you for the quick fix. Despite all the negative stuff, I do have to add that, Virtualizor support quality improved a lot vs the past.

As I said in the original post, I like the product, only wish that some things were handled differently (read better).

I meant the negative stuff about virtualizor in general ?.

You and I are on the same boat with broken stuff ??

yoursunny

@Neoon said:
As LONG you dont push that forbidden button called RESTART or STOP inside that said Panel or the Provider reboots the node.
You are fine, but if you do that, you are joining a round of russian roulette, you don't know what will hit you.

Looks like I can't reinstall the KVM until the alleged bug is fixed.

I say alleged because there's no recent bug report on Virtualizor forum.
https://www.softaculous.com/board/index.php?#cid6

---

It's time to ditch Virtualizor and make an open-source VM control software.

ehab

@yoursunny said:
It's time to ditch Virtualizor and make an open-source VM control software.

sounds like 10,000 pushes
up and down up ... up and down

reminds me of ; someone already posted

lentro

@yoursunny said: It's time to ditch Virtualizor and make an open-source VM control software.

Proxmox community edition (what I use) or Cloudmin?

ehab

love the Proxmox --- it is true love

Freek

@AnthonySmith said:

@Freek said:

@AnthonySmith said:

@Freek said:

@chirag said:
Hi,

Sir ok, we will not add any new features to the patches from now on.
It will be purely bug fixes.

Well that was easy.

Again, all been said before over the years, it will not happen and if it does it will not last.

2 weeks in your testing/experimental branch (which no one is stupid enough to run in production and you guys are as shit are not testing) before forced into stable? how about you just actually listen and stop imposing updates altogether, allow your paying customers to decide when it is stable and let them roll back when it is not.

I appreciate there is a point when you need people on a minimum version, that is not 2 weeks, who do you think you are Archlinux?

I was being sarcastic, I see I forgot the /s in my post

lol sorry you must have left the /s in your beta branch.

Branches? How do you mean I can't push to master? I obviously just did! Do you know why Ci/CD just triggered a deployment? Yes I turned off the tests as the warnings were annoying. By the way why is our production down?

/s

yoursunny

@Freek said:
Branches? How do you mean I can't push to master? I obviously just did! Do you know why Ci/CD just triggered a deployment? Yes I turned off the tests as the warnings were annoying. By the way why is our production down?

I used to always force-push to master, and I get complaints every week.
Now I have a single develop branch that I can force-push, and the master or main branch that I don't force-push.
My deployment is generally based on the develop branch after CI passes.

Brueggus

@yoursunny said:

@Freek said:
Branches? How do you mean I can't push to master? I obviously just did! Do you know why Ci/CD just triggered a deployment? Yes I turned off the tests as the warnings were annoying. By the way why is our production down?

I used to always force-push to master, and I get complaints every week.
Now I have a single develop branch that I can force-push, and the master or main branch that I don't force-push.
My deployment is generally based on the develop branch after CI passes.

We're derailing this thread, but... I would be one of the people complaining Wouldn't it be way more clear do keep your commits "atomic" (as the consultants tend to say) in your dev branch and instead squash+merge to master?

mikho

@Brueggus said:
We're derailing this thread

@AnthonySmith calling cleanup in isle 3.
@LES-Moderator (is that a space in the username?)

Would like to keep this topic on subject as it is posted in ”Industry News”.

—this message will self-destruct after a Moderator has read the message—

Rahul

@yoursunny do the honours

pimp push up

@ehab said: Proxmox

to a whole new level.

mikho

@chirag said:
Hi,

Sir ok, we will not add any new features to the patches from now on.
It will be purely bug fixes.

============== Patch 7 ==============

54. [Task] Virtio will be default NIC Driver for Proxmox KVM since 3.0.5.7

Is this considered a patch or new/changed feature?

Should it be included in a patch release?

According to your blog.
Patch 6 was released on Jan 29th.
Now patch 7 on Feb 2.

Neoon

VirtualizorStream

Asim

@Neoon said: VirtualizorStream

and then comes Rockylizor lol

Abdullah

It's tough to believe their Proxmox support is fully broken. I'm sure they didn't test proxmox support before rolling out officially.

I only discovered that after setting up one of the nodes.
Windows VMs don't work, disk drivers are set incorrect, CPU topology does not set sockets & cores correct. backups are broken, the list goes on and on.

Things need to be changed from proxmox manual..I'm stuck.

mikho

@Abdullah said:
It's tough to believe their Proxmox support is fully broken. I'm sure they didn't test proxmox support before rolling out officially.

I only discovered that after setting up one of the nodes.
Windows VMs don't work, disk drivers are set incorrect, CPU topology does not set sockets & cores correct. backups are broken, the list goes on and on.

Things need to be changed from proxmox manual..I'm stuck.

This after the latest patch? Or earlier?

Abdullah

@mikho said:

@Abdullah said:
It's tough to believe their Proxmox support is fully broken. I'm sure they didn't test proxmox support before rolling out officially.

I only discovered that after setting up one of the nodes.
Windows VMs don't work, disk drivers are set incorrect, CPU topology does not set sockets & cores correct. backups are broken, the list goes on and on.

Things need to be changed from proxmox manual..I'm stuck.

This after the latest patch? Or earlier?

All of those issues exist as I write now, I reported them in January, so they're slowly correcting those I think .

seriesn

To be really honest, why bother running virtualizor on top of proxmox? Unless it is absolutely needed, I would simply migrate the instance and either go virtualizor or proxmox.

Abdullah

@seriesn said:
To be really honest, why bother running virtualizor on top of proxmox? Unless it is absolutely needed, I would simply migrate the instance and either go virtualizor or proxmox.

Correct, that makes no sense. I'm already thinking of move to Proxmox only.
It's open source, free & works great.

Using Blesta, there is a nice Proxmox provisioning module, but it has not been updated for long & needs repairs.

InceptionHosting

@Abdullah said:

@seriesn said:
To be really honest, why bother running virtualizor on top of proxmox? Unless it is absolutely needed, I would simply migrate the instance and either go virtualizor or proxmox.

Correct, that makes no sense. I'm already thinking of move to Proxmox only.
It's open source, free & works great.

Using Blesta, there is a nice Proxmox provisioning module, but it has not been updated for long & needs repairs.

ProxCP looks good