Mailing-List: contact cloudstack-users-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of ivanoch@gmail.com designates
 209.85.210.175 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAKYr3zwqJBMjJ0QA=+=_yt3Pdp27WGFAM+7FC1oRMNEn0XjZLQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <E26CE9B2-784B-474F-B83A-D849E4EC5536@tgrahamcapital.com>
	<50856526.50004@nfinausa.com>
	<CAKBkivk9VcK5iAey6LSh5tS2m1UW4bWDcfzOjyS6Ob-hShS_SA@mail.gmail.com>
	<C25BA079-4220-4F44-821F-10117EE14D09@tgrahamcapital.com>
	<5085DA62.5080505@nfinausa.com>
	<CA+wMzV+xyykg_Nt4rtNCs3MO-8WL0W0C6ng0e7k4eVL+UjLObw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKYr3zwqJBMjJ0QA=+=_yt3Pdp27WGFAM+7FC1oRMNEn0XjZLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 11:09:17 +1100
Message-ID: 
 <CA+wMzVKSry-4LNt3TqiGit6wLH9uZYPj5t5wOcSFL8BZ6SQz_Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Primary Storage
From: Ivan Rodriguez <ivanoch@gmail.com>
To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae9340517f4514104ccaec7a2

--14dae9340517f4514104ccaec7a2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Solaris 11 ZFS and yes we tried different setups, raids levels number of
SSD cache, ARC zfs options etc etc etc.

Cheers

On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 11:05 AM, Outback Dingo <outbackdingo@gmail.com>wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 8:03 PM, Ivan Rodriguez <ivanoch@gmail.com> wrote:
> > We are using ZFS, with jbod, not in production yet exporting NFS to
> > cloudstack, I'm not really happy about the performance
> > but I think is related to the hardware itself rather than technology, we
> > are using intel SR2625UR and Intel 320 SSD, we were evaluating gluster as
> > well, but we decided to move away from that path since gluster nfs is
> still
> > performing poorly,  plus we would like to see cloudstack integrating the
> > gluster-fuse module, we haven't decided the final storage setup but at
> the
> > moment we had better results with ZFS.
> >
> >
>
> question is whos ZFS and have you "tweaked" the zfs / nfs config for
> performance
>
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 10:44 AM, Nik Martin <nik.martin@nfinausa.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> On 10/22/2012 05:49 PM, Trevor Francis wrote:
> >>
> >>> ZFS looks really interesting to me and I am leaning that way. I am
> >>> considering using FreeNAS, as people seem to be having good luck with
> >>> it. Can anyone weigh in here?
> >>>
> >>>
> >> My personal opinion, I think FreeNAS and OpenFiler have horrible,
> horrible
> >> User Interfaces - not very intuitive, and they both seem to be file
> servers
> >> with things like iSCSI targets tacked on as an afterthought.
> >>
> >> Nik
> >>
> >>
> >>> Trevor Francis
> >>> Partner
> >>> 46 Labs | The PeerEdge Cloud
> >>> http://www.46labs.com <http://www.46labs.com/> |
> http://www.peeredge.net
> >>> <http://www.peeredge.net/>
> >>> 405-362-0046 - Voice  | 405-410-4980 - Cell
> >>> trevorgfrancis - Skype
> >>> trevor@46labs.com <mailto:trevor@46labs.com>
> >>> Solutions Provider for the Telecom Industry
> >>>
> >>> <http://www.twitter.com/**peeredge <http://www.twitter.com/peeredge>><
> >>> http://www.twitter.**com/peeredge <http://www.twitter.com/peeredge>><
> >>> http://www.**twitter.com/peeredge <http://www.twitter.com/peeredge>><
> >>> http://**www.facebook.com/PeerEdge <http://www.facebook.com/PeerEdge>>
> >>>
> >>> On Oct 22, 2012, at 2:30 PM, Jason Davis wrote:
> >>>
> >>>  ZFS would be an interesting setup as you can do the cache pools like
> you
> >>>> would do in CacheCade. The problem with ZFS or CacheCade+DRBD is that
> >>>> they
> >>>> really don't scale out well if you are looking for something with a
> >>>> unified
> >>>> name space. I'll say however that ZFS is a battle hardened FS with
> tons
> >>>> of
> >>>> shops using it. A lot of the whiz-bang SSD+SATA disk SAN things these
> >>>> smaller start up companies are hocking are just ZFS appliances.
> >>>>
> >>>> RBD looks interesting but I'm not sure if I would be willing to put
> >>>> production data on it, I'm not sure how performant it is IRL. From a
> >>>> purely technical perspective, it looks REALLY cool.
> >>>>
> >>>> I suppose anything is fast if you put SSDs in it :) GlusterFS is
> another
> >>>> option although historically small/random IO has not been it's strong
> >>>> point.
> >>>>
> >>>> If you are ok spending money on software and want a scale out block
> >>>> storage
> >>>> then you might want to consider HP LeftHand's VSA product. I am
> >>>> personally
> >>>> partial to NFS plays:) I went the exact opposite approach and settled
> on
> >>>> Isilon for our primary storage for our CS deployment.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Nik Martin <nik.martin@nfinausa.com
> >>>> <mailto:nik.martin@nfinausa.**com <nik.martin@nfinausa.com>>>wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>  On 10/22/2012 10:16 AM, Trevor Francis wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  We are looking at building a Primary Storage solution for an
> >>>>>> enterprise/carrier class application. However, we want to build it
> >>>>>> using
> >>>>>> a FOSS solution and not a commercial solution. Do you have a
> >>>>>> recommendation on platform?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>  Trevor,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I got EXCELLENT results builing a SAN from FOSS using:
> >>>>> OS: Centos
> >>>>> Hardware: 2X storage servers, with 12x2TB 3.5 SATA drives.  LSI
> MegaRAID
> >>>>> with CacheCade Pro, with 240 GB Intel 520 SSDs configured to do SSD
> >>>>> caching
> >>>>> (alternately, look at FlashCache from Facebook)
> >>>>> intel 10GB dual port nics, one port for crossover, on port for up
> link
> >>>>> to
> >>>>> storage network
> >>>>>
> >>>>> DRBD for real time block replication to active-active
> >>>>> Pacemaker+corosync for HA Resource management
> >>>>> tgtd for iSCSI target
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If you want file backed storage, XFS is a very good filesystem on
> Linux
> >>>>> now.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Pacemaker+Corosync can be difficult to grok at the beginning, but
> that
> >>>>> setup gave me a VERY high performance SAN.  The downside is it is
> >>>>> entirely
> >>>>> managed by CLI, no UI whatsoever.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>  Trevor Francis
> >>>>>> Partner
> >>>>>> 46 Labs | The PeerEdge Cloud
> >>>>>> http://www.46labs.com <http://www.46labs.com/> |
> >>>>>> http://www.peeredge.net
> >>>>>> <http://www.peeredge.net/>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 405-362-0046 - Voice  | 405-410-4980 - Cell
> >>>>>> trevorgfrancis - Skype
> >>>>>> trevor@46labs.com <mailto:trevor@46labs.com> <mailto:
> trevor@46labs.com
> >>>>>> >
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Solutions Provider for the Telecom Industry
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> <http://www.twitter.com/****peeredge<
> http://www.twitter.com/**peeredge><
> >>>>>> http://www.twitter.com/**peeredge <http://www.twitter.com/peeredge
> >>><
> >>>>>> http://www.twitter.**com/**peeredge <
> http://www.twitter.com/**peeredge<http://www.twitter.com/peeredge>
> >>>>>> >><
> >>>>>> http://www.**twitter.com/**peeredge <http://twitter.com/peeredge> <
> >>>>>> http://www.twitter.com/**peeredge <http://www.twitter.com/peeredge
> >>><
> >>>>>> http://**www.facebook.com/**PeerEdge<
> http://www.facebook.com/PeerEdge><
> >>>>>> http://www.facebook.com/**PeerEdge <
> http://www.facebook.com/PeerEdge>
> >>>>>> >>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
>

--14dae9340517f4514104ccaec7a2--