cloudstack-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Trevor Francis <trevor.fran...@tgrahamcapital.com>
Subject Re: NFS vs iSCSI
Date Mon, 29 Oct 2012 03:11:59 GMT
Good question. This is a private cloud for an application we have developed. We will have no
actual "public" users installing OS' of varying ranges. 

That being said. Cent 6.3 64-bit, is the only guest OS being deployed. It is also what I am
intending to deploy my NFS using. 

Yes, I know that ZFS rocks and FreeBSD is the bees knees, but we know Cent and everything
on our platform is standardized around that (short of XenServer hosts). Also, we don't need
to take advantage of ZFS caching, as all of our deployed storage for guests is SSD anyway.


Thanks!

TGF




On Oct 28, 2012, at 9:56 PM, Jason Davis <scr512@gmail.com> wrote:

> Decent read:
> http://lass.cs.umass.edu/papers/pdf/FAST04.pdf
> 
> As far as CS + XenServer, I prefer NFS. Easier to manage, thin provisioning
> works from the get go (which is super important as XenServer uses CoW
> (linked clones) iterations from the template you use.) By default, XS uses
> LVM over iSCSI with iSCSI which can be confusing to administer. That and it
> doesn't thin provision... which sucks...
> 
> In theory there are latency penalties with NFS (as mentioned in the paper)
> but in a live deployment, I never ran into this.
> On Oct 28, 2012 9:03 PM, "Trevor Francis" <trevor.francis@tgrahamcapital.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> I know this has been discussed on other forums with limited success in
>> explaining which is best in for aproduction environment, but could you
>> cloudstackers weigh in which storage technology would be best for both
>> primary and secondary storage for VMs running on Xenserver? Both are pretty
>> trivial to setup with NFS being the easiest.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Trevor Francis
>> 
>> 
>> 


Mime
View raw message