cloudstack-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ivan Kudryavtsev <kudryavtsev...@bw-sw.com>
Subject Re: AW: KVM storage cluster
Date Fri, 02 Feb 2018 01:58:26 GMT
Hi, Swen. Do you test with direct or cached ops or buffered ones? Is it a
write test or rw with certain rw percenrage? Hardly believe the deployment
can do 250k IOs for writting with single VM test.

2 февр. 2018 г. 4:56 пользователь "S. Brüseke - proIO GmbH" <
s.brueseke@proio.com> написал:

I am also testing with ScaleIO on CentOS7 with KVM. With a 3 node cluster
with each node has 2x 2TB SSD (Samsung PM1663a) I get 250.000 IOPS when
doing a fio test (random 4k).
The only problem is that I do not know how to mount the shared volume so
that KVM can use it to store vms on it. Does anyone know how to do it?

Mit freundlichen Grüßen / With kind regards,

Swen

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Andrija Panic [mailto:andrija.panic@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 1. Februar 2018 22:00
An: users <users@cloudstack.apache.org>
Betreff: Re: KVM storage cluster

a bit late, but:

- for any IO heavy (medium even...) workload, try to avoid CEPH, no
offence, simply it takes lot of $$$ to make CEPH perform in random IO
worlds (imagine RHEL and vendors provide only refernce architecutre with
SEQUNATIAL benchmark workload, not random) - not to mention a huge list of
bugs we hit back in the days (simply, one/single great guy handled the CEPH
integration for CloudStack, but otherwise not lot of help from other
committers, if not mistaken, afaik...)
- NFS better performance but not magic... (but most well supported, code
wise, bug-less wise :)
- and for top notch (cost some $$$) SolidFire is the way to go (we have
tons of IO heavy customers, so this THE solution really, after living with
CEPH, then NFS on SSDs, etc) and provides guarantied IOPS etc...

Cheers.

On 7 January 2018 at 22:46, Grégoire Lamodière <g.lamodiere@dimsi.fr> wrote:

> Hi Vahric,
>
> Thank you. I will have a look on it.
>
> Grégoire
>
>
>
> Envoyé depuis mon smartphone Samsung Galaxy.
>
>
> -------- Message d'origine --------
> De : Vahric MUHTARYAN <vahric@doruk.net.tr> Date : 07/01/2018 21:08
> (GMT+01:00) À : users@cloudstack.apache.org Objet : Re: KVM storage
> cluster
>
> Hello Grégoire,
>
> I suggest you to look EMC scaleio for block based operations. It has a
> free one too ! And as a block working better then Ceph ;)
>
> Regards
> VM
>
> On 7.01.2018 18:12, "Grégoire Lamodière" <g.lamodiere@dimsi.fr> wrote:
>
>     Hi Ivan,
>
>     Thank you for your quick reply.
>
>     I'll have a look on Ceph and related perfs.
>     As you mentionned, 2 DRDB nfs servers can do the job, but if I can
> avoid using 2 blades for just passing blocks to nfs, this is even
> better (and maintain them as well).
>
>     Thanks for pointing to ceph.
>
>     Grégoire
>
>
>
>
>     ---
>     Grégoire Lamodière
>     T/ + 33 6 76 27 03 31
>     F/ + 33 1 75 43 89 71
>
>     -----Message d'origine-----
>     De : Ivan Kudryavtsev [mailto:kudryavtsev_ia@bw-sw.com]
>     Envoyé : dimanche 7 janvier 2018 15:20
>     À : users@cloudstack.apache.org
>     Objet : Re: KVM storage cluster
>
>     Hi, Grégoire,
>     You could have
>     - local storage if you like, so every compute node could have own
> space (one lun per host)
>     - to have Ceph deployed on the same compute nodes (distribute raw
> devices among nodes)
>     - to dedicate certain node as NFS server (or two servers with
> DRBD)
>
>     I don't think that shared FS is a good option, even clustered LVM
> is a big pain.
>
>     2018-01-07 21:08 GMT+07:00 Grégoire Lamodière <g.lamodiere@dimsi.fr>:
>
>     > Dear all,
>     >
>     > Since Citrix changed deeply the free version of XenServer 7.3, I
> am in
>     > the process of Pocing moving our Xen clusters to KVM on Centos 7 I
>     > decided to use HP blades connected to HP P2000 over mutipath SAS
> links.
>     >
>     > The network part seems fine to me, not so far from what we used to
do
>     > with Xen.
>     > About the storage, I am a little but confused about the shared
>     > mountpoint storage option offerds by CS.
>     >
>     > What would be the good option, in terms of CS, to create a cluster
fs
>     > using my SAS array ?
>     > I read somewhere (a Dag SlideShare I think) that GFS2 is the only
>     > clustered FS supported by CS. Is it still correct ?
>     > Does it mean I have to create the GFS2 cluster, make identical mount
>     > conf on all host, and use it on CS as NFS ?
>     > I do not have to add the storage to KVM prior CS zone creation ?
>     >
>     > Thanks a lot for any help / information.
>     >
>     > ---
>     > Grégoire Lamodière
>     > T/ + 33 6 76 27 03 31
>     > F/ + 33 1 75 43 89 71
>     >
>     >
>
>
>     --
>     With best regards, Ivan Kudryavtsev
>     Bitworks Software, Ltd.
>     Cell: +7-923-414-1515
>     WWW: http://bitworks.software/ <http://bw-sw.com/>
>
>
>
>


--

Andrija Panić


- proIO GmbH -
Geschäftsführer: Swen Brüseke
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Frankfurt am Main

USt-IdNr. DE 267 075 918
Registergericht: Frankfurt am Main - HRB 86239

Diese E-Mail enthält vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschützte
Informationen.
Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind oder diese E-Mail irrtümlich
erhalten haben,
informieren Sie bitte sofort den Absender und vernichten Sie diese Mail.
Das unerlaubte Kopieren sowie die unbefugte Weitergabe dieser Mail sind
nicht gestattet.

This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in
error) please notify
the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail.
Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in
this e-mail is strictly forbidden.

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message