SUSE Harvester

What is SUSE Harvester?

Key Functions:

• Kubernetes-native - VMs as Kubernetes workloads
• Rancher Integration - management via Rancher
• Longhorn Storage - built-in software-defined storage
• 100% Open Source - zero licensing costs

What problem does it solve?

flowchart LR
    subgraph Proprietary Virtualization Problem
        B --> C[Vendor lock-in]
        C --> D[Broadcom acquisition]
        D --> E[Rising costs]
    end

    subgraph Harvester Solution
        F[Harvester HCI] --> G[100% Open Source]
        G --> H[Zero licenses]
        H --> I[Kubernetes-native]
        I --> J[Future-proof]
    end

    style A fill:#dc2626,stroke:#b91c1c,color:#fff
    style B fill:#dc2626,stroke:#b91c1c,color:#fff
    style C fill:#dc2626,stroke:#b91c1c,color:#fff
    style D fill:#dc2626,stroke:#b91c1c,color:#fff
    style E fill:#dc2626,stroke:#b91c1c,color:#fff
    style F fill:#22c55e,stroke:#16a34a,color:#fff
    style G fill:#22c55e,stroke:#16a34a,color:#fff
    style H fill:#22c55e,stroke:#16a34a,color:#fff
    style I fill:#22c55e,stroke:#16a34a,color:#fff
    style J fill:#22c55e,stroke:#16a34a,color:#fff

Common Problems:

• Broadcom acquisition = rising virtualization licensing costs
• Vendor lock-in to proprietary virtualization
• Separate tools for VMs and containers
• Expensive HCI solutions (vSAN, Nutanix)
• No Kubernetes-native virtualization

Harvester Architecture

flowchart TD
    A[Rancher Management] --> B[Harvester Cluster]
    B --> C[Node 1]
    B --> D[Node 2]
    B --> E[Node 3]

    C --> F[Kubernetes]
    D --> F
    E --> F

    F --> G[KubeVirt - VM]
    F --> H[Longhorn - Storage]
    F --> I[Containers]

    style A fill:#f59e0b,stroke:#d97706,color:#fff
    style B fill:#8b5cf6,stroke:#7c3aed,color:#fff
    style C fill:#6366f1,stroke:#4f46e5,color:#fff
    style D fill:#6366f1,stroke:#4f46e5,color:#fff
    style E fill:#6366f1,stroke:#4f46e5,color:#fff
    style F fill:#22c55e,stroke:#16a34a,color:#fff
    style G fill:#22c55e,stroke:#16a34a,color:#fff
    style H fill:#22c55e,stroke:#16a34a,color:#fff
    style I fill:#22c55e,stroke:#16a34a,color:#fff

Key Features

Harvester vs vSphere vs Proxmox

Aspect	Harvester	vSphere	Proxmox VE
License	Open Source (Free)	Enterprise (expensive)	Open Source + Support
Kubernetes	Native (is K8s)	vSphere + Tanzu	None
Storage	Longhorn (built-in)	vSAN (additional license)	Ceph/ZFS
Container management	Native	Tanzu (additional)	LXC
Rancher integration	Native	None	None
Enterprise support	SUSE subscription	Broadcom license	Proxmox subscription
GPU passthrough	Yes	Yes	Yes
Live migration	Yes	Yes	Yes
Use case	Modern workloads, K8s-first	Traditional enterprise	SMB, homelab

Harvester Advantage:

• 100% open source - zero licensing costs
• Kubernetes-native - VMs and containers on one platform
• Longhorn built-in - no additional storage costs
• Rancher integration - one tool for VMs and K8s
• Edge-ready - lightweight deployment

Who is it for?

Specification

Parameter	Value
Minimum nodes	3 (HA), 1 (single node)
OS	SUSE Linux (immutable)
Hypervisor	KubeVirt
Storage	Longhorn
Networking	Canal, Multus
GPU	NVIDIA GPU passthrough
Management	Web UI, kubectl, Rancher
License	Apache 2.0 (Open Source)

FAQ

Is Harvester a traditional virtualization replacement? Yes for modern workloads. For legacy Windows apps vSphere may be better, but Harvester supports Windows VMs.

What does traditional virtualization migration look like? Import VMDK/OVA, bulk migration tools. Harvester can import VMs from vSphere.

Do I need Rancher? Not required, but recommended. Rancher adds multi-cluster management, RBAC, monitoring.

What about performance vs traditional virtualization? Comparable for most workloads. KubeVirt adds minimal overhead.

How does support work? Open source is free. Enterprise support via SUSE subscription.

Does nFlo deploy Harvester? Yes. Greenfield deployments and traditional virtualization migrations. Rancher integration, storage and networking configuration.