From a first glance at results, most of the participants upgraded to 4.4 but not yet to the latest 4.4.6.
A few participants installed oVirt Engine on alternative distributions derived from Red Hat Enterprise Linux: I would be happy to get some feedback about issues encountered while running there.
About one third of the participants are going to follow the oVirt project direction and stay on CentOS Stream.
A few people will join the group of those running on RHEL while 17% of the participants are going to try to move the engine on top of Rocky Linux.
5% of the participants will stay on 4.3/EL7: please be aware that oVirt 4.3 is not receiving security fixes and this may put your datacenter at risk.
On the host side, about half of the participants are still using cluster levels prior to 4.4.
About one third of the participants are running oVirt Node 4.4.
A few participants are running hosts with alternative distributions derived from Red Hat Enterprise Linux: I would be happy to get some feedback about issues encountered while running there.
In the future oVirt Node will see an increase of adoption following the changes related to CentOS Stream but also a significant one third of the participants will try to run oVirt hosts on Rocky Linux.
About 10% will join those who switched from CentOS Linux to CentOS Stream.
I'm a bit surprised nobody is reporting to be still on oVirt 3.x since a few datacenters with such versions are still up and running and with admin portal indexed by google.
About the hardware, Haswell family processors are the most commonly used but there's also a good number of more recent hardware deployments using Cascadelake and Skylake processors.
Only about 1% of the participants are running on ppc64le architecture.
Not surprisingly, most of the workload is running on GNU/Linux guests (mostly RHEL 7 and derivatives) but there's about one third of participants also running windows systems.
On the storage side, NFS is the most commonly used solution. Current configuration options are enough for most people and the hyperconverged solution is mostly considered adequate or not relevant for the use case of the participants. There are a few interesting suggestions on improving the storage configuration options which will be reviewed by the storage team.
On the automation side, ansible is the most commonly used tool but about 10% of the participants are using terraform too.
About plans for the next 2-3 years about 70% of the participants are going to stay on oVirt (thanks!), about 10% are considering moving to an oVirt downstream product and the remaining 20% are either considering moving to a different solution or have not yet decided. Of these, only 2% are considering OKD / Kubevirt as an alternative.
