You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@cloudstack.apache.org by Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> on 2020/09/14 02:50:05 UTC
Cloudstack - What Storage you using ?
HI
I just wonder what storage you all use for CloudStack ? And the number of
VM able to get spinned up for storage you use ?
Can anybody share the experience ?
--
Regards,
Hean Seng
Re: Cloudstack - What Storage you using ?
Posted by Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com>.
Hi Mauro Ferrano,
The High CPU is high for Storage Server or Compute Hypervisor ?
CEPH storage, require quite a big amount of server in order to deliver .
And it is not able to utilize raid card for performance , especially when
it run on all pure SSD, CEPH seems not able to deliver the expected result
and IO.
On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 9:58 AM Ivan Kudryavtsev <iv...@bw-sw.com> wrote:
> Hi, hypervisor restrictions configured for SO allows limiting iops, bps for
> NFS as well as for another storage, because they are enforced by qemu.
>
> ср, 14 окт. 2020 г., 01:53 Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > Do anybody know NFS implementation of Primary storage can support QOS for
> > IOPs in Services Offering ? I
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 8:20 PM Pratik Chandrakar <
> > chandrakarpratik@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I was asking for storage layer instead of VM.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 12:36 PM Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Local Disk is not possible for HA .
> > > >
> > > > If you can accept NFS, then HA is not an issue .
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 2:42 PM Pratik Chandrakar <
> > > > chandrakarpratik@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Andrija,
> > > > > I have a similar requirement like Hean. So what's your
> recommendation
> > > for
> > > > > HA with NFS/Local disk?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Oct 10, 2020 at 8:55 AM Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Andrija
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I am planning on a high end hypervisor , AMD EYPCv2 7742 CPU
> that
> > > get
> > > > > > 64core and 128thread , 384G RAM, etc , and multiple 10G card
> > bnond
> > > or
> > > > > 40G
> > > > > > card for storage network.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On this kind of server, probably get up to 200 VM per hypervisor.
> > > I'm
> > > > > > just afraid that NFS will create a bottleneck if the storage
> server
> > > is
> > > > > > running a lower-end Hardware on storage.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For ISCSI, normally won't be an issue of hardware cpu in storage
> > > server
> > > > > and
> > > > > > it act almost like external hard disk, while NFS needs to process
> > the
> > > > > file
> > > > > > system in Storage.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I had read through many articles, and mentioned GFS2 has many
> > > > issues. I
> > > > > > initially planned to run OCFS2, but it does not support REDHAT
> any
> > > > more,
> > > > > > and there is a bug on Ubuntu18 , not sure if solved. OCFS2
> should
> > > be a
> > > > > lot
> > > > > > more stable and less issue compare GFS2
> > > > > >
> > > > > > this is ocfs2 on ubuntu bug, which i am facing exactly the same.
> > > > > >
> > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-signed/+bug/1895010
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 6:41 PM Andrija Panic <
> > > andrija.panic@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > free advice - try to avoid Clustered File Systems always - due
> to
> > > > > > > complexity, and sometimes due to the utter lack of reliability
> (I
> > > > had,
> > > > > > > outside of ACS, an awful experience with GFS2, set by RedHat
> > > themself
> > > > > > for a
> > > > > > > former customer), etc - so Shared Mount point is to be skipped,
> > if
> > > > > > > possible.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Local disks - there are some downsides to VM live migration -
> so
> > > make
> > > > > > sure
> > > > > > > to understand the limits and options.
> > > > > > > iSCSI = same LUN attached to all KVM hosts = you again need
> > > Clustered
> > > > > > File
> > > > > > > System, and that will be, again, consumed as Shared Mount
> point.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For NFS, you are on your own when it comes to the performance
> and
> > > > > > tunning -
> > > > > > > this is outside of ACS - usually no high CPU usage on a
> > moderately
> > > > used
> > > > > > NFS
> > > > > > > server.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 at 18:45, Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > For using NFS, do you have performance issue like Storage
> CPU
> > > > > getting
> > > > > > > very
> > > > > > > > high ? And i believe this could be cause the the filesystem
> > is
> > > > > make
> > > > > > at
> > > > > > > > Storage instead of Compute Node.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thus i am thinking of is ISCSI or LocalStorage.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > For ISCSI, i prefer if can running on LVM , which i believe
> > > > > performance
> > > > > > > > shall be the best , compared localstroage where file-based.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > But facing issue of ISCSI is ShareMount point need Clustered
> > > File
> > > > > > > System,
> > > > > > > > otherwise you can only setup one Cluster one Host. Setting
> > up
> > > > > > Cluster
> > > > > > > > File system is issue here, GFS2 is no more support on
> CentOS
> > /
> > > > > > Redhat,
> > > > > > > > and there is bug in Ubuntu 18.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 6:54 PM Andrija Panic <
> > > > > andrija.panic@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > NFS is the rock-solid, and majority of users are using
> NFS, I
> > > can
> > > > > > tell
> > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > for sure.
> > > > > > > > > Do understand there is some difference between cheap
> > white-box
> > > > NFS
> > > > > > > > solution
> > > > > > > > > and a proprietary $$$ NFS solution, when it comes to
> > > performance.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Some users will use Ceph, some local disks (this is all KVM
> > so
> > > > far)
> > > > > > > > > VMware users might be heavy on iSCSI datastores,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > And that is probably true for 99% of ACS users - rest might
> > be
> > > > > > > > > experimenting with clustered solutions via OCFS/GFS2
> (shared
> > > > > > > mountpoint)
> > > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > > Gluster etc - but that is all not really suitable for a
> > serious
> > > > > > > > production
> > > > > > > > > usage IMO (usually,but there might be exceptions to this).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > SolidFire is also a $$$ solution that works very well,
> > > depending
> > > > on
> > > > > > > your
> > > > > > > > > hypervisor (best integration so far I believe is with KVM
> in
> > > > ACS).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Hope that helps
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 04:50, Hean Seng <
> heanseng@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > HI
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I just wonder what storage you all use for CloudStack ?
> > And
> > > > the
> > > > > > > number
> > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > VM able to get spinned up for storage you use ?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Can anybody share the experience ?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > > > Hean Seng
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Andrija Panić
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > Hean Seng
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Andrija Panić
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > Hean Seng
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > *Regards,*
> > > > > *Pratik Chandrakar*
> > > > > Scientist-C
> > > > > NIC - Chhattisgarh State Centre
> > > > > *Hall no.-AD2-14 ,* *2nd Floor *
> > > > > Mahanadi Bhavan , Mantralaya , New Raipur
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Hean Seng
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > *Regards,*
> > > *Pratik Chandrakar*
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Hean Seng
> >
>
--
Regards,
Hean Seng
Re: Cloudstack - What Storage you using ?
Posted by Ivan Kudryavtsev <iv...@bw-sw.com>.
Hi, hypervisor restrictions configured for SO allows limiting iops, bps for
NFS as well as for another storage, because they are enforced by qemu.
ср, 14 окт. 2020 г., 01:53 Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com>:
> Hi
>
> Do anybody know NFS implementation of Primary storage can support QOS for
> IOPs in Services Offering ? I
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 8:20 PM Pratik Chandrakar <
> chandrakarpratik@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I was asking for storage layer instead of VM.
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 12:36 PM Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Local Disk is not possible for HA .
> > >
> > > If you can accept NFS, then HA is not an issue .
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 2:42 PM Pratik Chandrakar <
> > > chandrakarpratik@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Andrija,
> > > > I have a similar requirement like Hean. So what's your recommendation
> > for
> > > > HA with NFS/Local disk?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Oct 10, 2020 at 8:55 AM Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Andrija
> > > > >
> > > > > I am planning on a high end hypervisor , AMD EYPCv2 7742 CPU that
> > get
> > > > > 64core and 128thread , 384G RAM, etc , and multiple 10G card
> bnond
> > or
> > > > 40G
> > > > > card for storage network.
> > > > >
> > > > > On this kind of server, probably get up to 200 VM per hypervisor.
> > I'm
> > > > > just afraid that NFS will create a bottleneck if the storage server
> > is
> > > > > running a lower-end Hardware on storage.
> > > > >
> > > > > For ISCSI, normally won't be an issue of hardware cpu in storage
> > server
> > > > and
> > > > > it act almost like external hard disk, while NFS needs to process
> the
> > > > file
> > > > > system in Storage.
> > > > >
> > > > > I had read through many articles, and mentioned GFS2 has many
> > > issues. I
> > > > > initially planned to run OCFS2, but it does not support REDHAT any
> > > more,
> > > > > and there is a bug on Ubuntu18 , not sure if solved. OCFS2 should
> > be a
> > > > lot
> > > > > more stable and less issue compare GFS2
> > > > >
> > > > > this is ocfs2 on ubuntu bug, which i am facing exactly the same.
> > > > >
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-signed/+bug/1895010
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 6:41 PM Andrija Panic <
> > andrija.panic@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > free advice - try to avoid Clustered File Systems always - due to
> > > > > > complexity, and sometimes due to the utter lack of reliability (I
> > > had,
> > > > > > outside of ACS, an awful experience with GFS2, set by RedHat
> > themself
> > > > > for a
> > > > > > former customer), etc - so Shared Mount point is to be skipped,
> if
> > > > > > possible.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Local disks - there are some downsides to VM live migration - so
> > make
> > > > > sure
> > > > > > to understand the limits and options.
> > > > > > iSCSI = same LUN attached to all KVM hosts = you again need
> > Clustered
> > > > > File
> > > > > > System, and that will be, again, consumed as Shared Mount point.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For NFS, you are on your own when it comes to the performance and
> > > > > tunning -
> > > > > > this is outside of ACS - usually no high CPU usage on a
> moderately
> > > used
> > > > > NFS
> > > > > > server.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 at 18:45, Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > For using NFS, do you have performance issue like Storage CPU
> > > > getting
> > > > > > very
> > > > > > > high ? And i believe this could be cause the the filesystem
> is
> > > > make
> > > > > at
> > > > > > > Storage instead of Compute Node.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thus i am thinking of is ISCSI or LocalStorage.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For ISCSI, i prefer if can running on LVM , which i believe
> > > > performance
> > > > > > > shall be the best , compared localstroage where file-based.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But facing issue of ISCSI is ShareMount point need Clustered
> > File
> > > > > > System,
> > > > > > > otherwise you can only setup one Cluster one Host. Setting
> up
> > > > > Cluster
> > > > > > > File system is issue here, GFS2 is no more support on CentOS
> /
> > > > > Redhat,
> > > > > > > and there is bug in Ubuntu 18.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 6:54 PM Andrija Panic <
> > > > andrija.panic@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > NFS is the rock-solid, and majority of users are using NFS, I
> > can
> > > > > tell
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > for sure.
> > > > > > > > Do understand there is some difference between cheap
> white-box
> > > NFS
> > > > > > > solution
> > > > > > > > and a proprietary $$$ NFS solution, when it comes to
> > performance.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Some users will use Ceph, some local disks (this is all KVM
> so
> > > far)
> > > > > > > > VMware users might be heavy on iSCSI datastores,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > And that is probably true for 99% of ACS users - rest might
> be
> > > > > > > > experimenting with clustered solutions via OCFS/GFS2 (shared
> > > > > > mountpoint)
> > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > Gluster etc - but that is all not really suitable for a
> serious
> > > > > > > production
> > > > > > > > usage IMO (usually,but there might be exceptions to this).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > SolidFire is also a $$$ solution that works very well,
> > depending
> > > on
> > > > > > your
> > > > > > > > hypervisor (best integration so far I believe is with KVM in
> > > ACS).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hope that helps
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 04:50, Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > HI
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I just wonder what storage you all use for CloudStack ?
> And
> > > the
> > > > > > number
> > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > VM able to get spinned up for storage you use ?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Can anybody share the experience ?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > > Hean Seng
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Andrija Panić
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > Hean Seng
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Andrija Panić
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Hean Seng
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > *Regards,*
> > > > *Pratik Chandrakar*
> > > > Scientist-C
> > > > NIC - Chhattisgarh State Centre
> > > > *Hall no.-AD2-14 ,* *2nd Floor *
> > > > Mahanadi Bhavan , Mantralaya , New Raipur
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > > Hean Seng
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Regards,*
> > *Pratik Chandrakar*
> >
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Hean Seng
>
Re: Cloudstack - What Storage you using ?
Posted by Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com>.
Hi
Do anybody know NFS implementation of Primary storage can support QOS for
IOPs in Services Offering ? I
On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 8:20 PM Pratik Chandrakar <
chandrakarpratik@gmail.com> wrote:
> I was asking for storage layer instead of VM.
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 12:36 PM Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Local Disk is not possible for HA .
> >
> > If you can accept NFS, then HA is not an issue .
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 2:42 PM Pratik Chandrakar <
> > chandrakarpratik@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Andrija,
> > > I have a similar requirement like Hean. So what's your recommendation
> for
> > > HA with NFS/Local disk?
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Oct 10, 2020 at 8:55 AM Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Andrija
> > > >
> > > > I am planning on a high end hypervisor , AMD EYPCv2 7742 CPU that
> get
> > > > 64core and 128thread , 384G RAM, etc , and multiple 10G card bnond
> or
> > > 40G
> > > > card for storage network.
> > > >
> > > > On this kind of server, probably get up to 200 VM per hypervisor.
> I'm
> > > > just afraid that NFS will create a bottleneck if the storage server
> is
> > > > running a lower-end Hardware on storage.
> > > >
> > > > For ISCSI, normally won't be an issue of hardware cpu in storage
> server
> > > and
> > > > it act almost like external hard disk, while NFS needs to process the
> > > file
> > > > system in Storage.
> > > >
> > > > I had read through many articles, and mentioned GFS2 has many
> > issues. I
> > > > initially planned to run OCFS2, but it does not support REDHAT any
> > more,
> > > > and there is a bug on Ubuntu18 , not sure if solved. OCFS2 should
> be a
> > > lot
> > > > more stable and less issue compare GFS2
> > > >
> > > > this is ocfs2 on ubuntu bug, which i am facing exactly the same.
> > > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-signed/+bug/1895010
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 6:41 PM Andrija Panic <
> andrija.panic@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > free advice - try to avoid Clustered File Systems always - due to
> > > > > complexity, and sometimes due to the utter lack of reliability (I
> > had,
> > > > > outside of ACS, an awful experience with GFS2, set by RedHat
> themself
> > > > for a
> > > > > former customer), etc - so Shared Mount point is to be skipped, if
> > > > > possible.
> > > > >
> > > > > Local disks - there are some downsides to VM live migration - so
> make
> > > > sure
> > > > > to understand the limits and options.
> > > > > iSCSI = same LUN attached to all KVM hosts = you again need
> Clustered
> > > > File
> > > > > System, and that will be, again, consumed as Shared Mount point.
> > > > >
> > > > > For NFS, you are on your own when it comes to the performance and
> > > > tunning -
> > > > > this is outside of ACS - usually no high CPU usage on a moderately
> > used
> > > > NFS
> > > > > server.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 at 18:45, Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > For using NFS, do you have performance issue like Storage CPU
> > > getting
> > > > > very
> > > > > > high ? And i believe this could be cause the the filesystem is
> > > make
> > > > at
> > > > > > Storage instead of Compute Node.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thus i am thinking of is ISCSI or LocalStorage.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For ISCSI, i prefer if can running on LVM , which i believe
> > > performance
> > > > > > shall be the best , compared localstroage where file-based.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But facing issue of ISCSI is ShareMount point need Clustered
> File
> > > > > System,
> > > > > > otherwise you can only setup one Cluster one Host. Setting up
> > > > Cluster
> > > > > > File system is issue here, GFS2 is no more support on CentOS /
> > > > Redhat,
> > > > > > and there is bug in Ubuntu 18.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 6:54 PM Andrija Panic <
> > > andrija.panic@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > NFS is the rock-solid, and majority of users are using NFS, I
> can
> > > > tell
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > for sure.
> > > > > > > Do understand there is some difference between cheap white-box
> > NFS
> > > > > > solution
> > > > > > > and a proprietary $$$ NFS solution, when it comes to
> performance.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Some users will use Ceph, some local disks (this is all KVM so
> > far)
> > > > > > > VMware users might be heavy on iSCSI datastores,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > And that is probably true for 99% of ACS users - rest might be
> > > > > > > experimenting with clustered solutions via OCFS/GFS2 (shared
> > > > > mountpoint)
> > > > > > or
> > > > > > > Gluster etc - but that is all not really suitable for a serious
> > > > > > production
> > > > > > > usage IMO (usually,but there might be exceptions to this).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > SolidFire is also a $$$ solution that works very well,
> depending
> > on
> > > > > your
> > > > > > > hypervisor (best integration so far I believe is with KVM in
> > ACS).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hope that helps
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 04:50, Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > HI
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I just wonder what storage you all use for CloudStack ? And
> > the
> > > > > number
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > VM able to get spinned up for storage you use ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Can anybody share the experience ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > > Hean Seng
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Andrija Panić
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > Hean Seng
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > > Andrija Panić
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Hean Seng
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > *Regards,*
> > > *Pratik Chandrakar*
> > > Scientist-C
> > > NIC - Chhattisgarh State Centre
> > > *Hall no.-AD2-14 ,* *2nd Floor *
> > > Mahanadi Bhavan , Mantralaya , New Raipur
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Hean Seng
> >
>
>
> --
> *Regards,*
> *Pratik Chandrakar*
>
--
Regards,
Hean Seng
Re: Cloudstack - What Storage you using ?
Posted by Pratik Chandrakar <ch...@gmail.com>.
I was asking for storage layer instead of VM.
On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 12:36 PM Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Local Disk is not possible for HA .
>
> If you can accept NFS, then HA is not an issue .
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 2:42 PM Pratik Chandrakar <
> chandrakarpratik@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Andrija,
> > I have a similar requirement like Hean. So what's your recommendation for
> > HA with NFS/Local disk?
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 10, 2020 at 8:55 AM Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Andrija
> > >
> > > I am planning on a high end hypervisor , AMD EYPCv2 7742 CPU that get
> > > 64core and 128thread , 384G RAM, etc , and multiple 10G card bnond or
> > 40G
> > > card for storage network.
> > >
> > > On this kind of server, probably get up to 200 VM per hypervisor. I'm
> > > just afraid that NFS will create a bottleneck if the storage server is
> > > running a lower-end Hardware on storage.
> > >
> > > For ISCSI, normally won't be an issue of hardware cpu in storage server
> > and
> > > it act almost like external hard disk, while NFS needs to process the
> > file
> > > system in Storage.
> > >
> > > I had read through many articles, and mentioned GFS2 has many
> issues. I
> > > initially planned to run OCFS2, but it does not support REDHAT any
> more,
> > > and there is a bug on Ubuntu18 , not sure if solved. OCFS2 should be a
> > lot
> > > more stable and less issue compare GFS2
> > >
> > > this is ocfs2 on ubuntu bug, which i am facing exactly the same.
> > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-signed/+bug/1895010
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 6:41 PM Andrija Panic <an...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > free advice - try to avoid Clustered File Systems always - due to
> > > > complexity, and sometimes due to the utter lack of reliability (I
> had,
> > > > outside of ACS, an awful experience with GFS2, set by RedHat themself
> > > for a
> > > > former customer), etc - so Shared Mount point is to be skipped, if
> > > > possible.
> > > >
> > > > Local disks - there are some downsides to VM live migration - so make
> > > sure
> > > > to understand the limits and options.
> > > > iSCSI = same LUN attached to all KVM hosts = you again need Clustered
> > > File
> > > > System, and that will be, again, consumed as Shared Mount point.
> > > >
> > > > For NFS, you are on your own when it comes to the performance and
> > > tunning -
> > > > this is outside of ACS - usually no high CPU usage on a moderately
> used
> > > NFS
> > > > server.
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 at 18:45, Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > For using NFS, do you have performance issue like Storage CPU
> > getting
> > > > very
> > > > > high ? And i believe this could be cause the the filesystem is
> > make
> > > at
> > > > > Storage instead of Compute Node.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thus i am thinking of is ISCSI or LocalStorage.
> > > > >
> > > > > For ISCSI, i prefer if can running on LVM , which i believe
> > performance
> > > > > shall be the best , compared localstroage where file-based.
> > > > >
> > > > > But facing issue of ISCSI is ShareMount point need Clustered File
> > > > System,
> > > > > otherwise you can only setup one Cluster one Host. Setting up
> > > Cluster
> > > > > File system is issue here, GFS2 is no more support on CentOS /
> > > Redhat,
> > > > > and there is bug in Ubuntu 18.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 6:54 PM Andrija Panic <
> > andrija.panic@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > NFS is the rock-solid, and majority of users are using NFS, I can
> > > tell
> > > > > that
> > > > > > for sure.
> > > > > > Do understand there is some difference between cheap white-box
> NFS
> > > > > solution
> > > > > > and a proprietary $$$ NFS solution, when it comes to performance.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Some users will use Ceph, some local disks (this is all KVM so
> far)
> > > > > > VMware users might be heavy on iSCSI datastores,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And that is probably true for 99% of ACS users - rest might be
> > > > > > experimenting with clustered solutions via OCFS/GFS2 (shared
> > > > mountpoint)
> > > > > or
> > > > > > Gluster etc - but that is all not really suitable for a serious
> > > > > production
> > > > > > usage IMO (usually,but there might be exceptions to this).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > SolidFire is also a $$$ solution that works very well, depending
> on
> > > > your
> > > > > > hypervisor (best integration so far I believe is with KVM in
> ACS).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hope that helps
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 04:50, Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > HI
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I just wonder what storage you all use for CloudStack ? And
> the
> > > > number
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > VM able to get spinned up for storage you use ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Can anybody share the experience ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > Hean Seng
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Andrija Panić
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Hean Seng
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Andrija Panić
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > > Hean Seng
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Regards,*
> > *Pratik Chandrakar*
> > Scientist-C
> > NIC - Chhattisgarh State Centre
> > *Hall no.-AD2-14 ,* *2nd Floor *
> > Mahanadi Bhavan , Mantralaya , New Raipur
> >
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Hean Seng
>
--
*Regards,*
*Pratik Chandrakar*
Re: Cloudstack - What Storage you using ?
Posted by Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com>.
Local Disk is not possible for HA .
If you can accept NFS, then HA is not an issue .
On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 2:42 PM Pratik Chandrakar <
chandrakarpratik@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Andrija,
> I have a similar requirement like Hean. So what's your recommendation for
> HA with NFS/Local disk?
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 10, 2020 at 8:55 AM Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Andrija
> >
> > I am planning on a high end hypervisor , AMD EYPCv2 7742 CPU that get
> > 64core and 128thread , 384G RAM, etc , and multiple 10G card bnond or
> 40G
> > card for storage network.
> >
> > On this kind of server, probably get up to 200 VM per hypervisor. I'm
> > just afraid that NFS will create a bottleneck if the storage server is
> > running a lower-end Hardware on storage.
> >
> > For ISCSI, normally won't be an issue of hardware cpu in storage server
> and
> > it act almost like external hard disk, while NFS needs to process the
> file
> > system in Storage.
> >
> > I had read through many articles, and mentioned GFS2 has many issues. I
> > initially planned to run OCFS2, but it does not support REDHAT any more,
> > and there is a bug on Ubuntu18 , not sure if solved. OCFS2 should be a
> lot
> > more stable and less issue compare GFS2
> >
> > this is ocfs2 on ubuntu bug, which i am facing exactly the same.
> > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-signed/+bug/1895010
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 6:41 PM Andrija Panic <an...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > free advice - try to avoid Clustered File Systems always - due to
> > > complexity, and sometimes due to the utter lack of reliability (I had,
> > > outside of ACS, an awful experience with GFS2, set by RedHat themself
> > for a
> > > former customer), etc - so Shared Mount point is to be skipped, if
> > > possible.
> > >
> > > Local disks - there are some downsides to VM live migration - so make
> > sure
> > > to understand the limits and options.
> > > iSCSI = same LUN attached to all KVM hosts = you again need Clustered
> > File
> > > System, and that will be, again, consumed as Shared Mount point.
> > >
> > > For NFS, you are on your own when it comes to the performance and
> > tunning -
> > > this is outside of ACS - usually no high CPU usage on a moderately used
> > NFS
> > > server.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 at 18:45, Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > For using NFS, do you have performance issue like Storage CPU
> getting
> > > very
> > > > high ? And i believe this could be cause the the filesystem is
> make
> > at
> > > > Storage instead of Compute Node.
> > > >
> > > > Thus i am thinking of is ISCSI or LocalStorage.
> > > >
> > > > For ISCSI, i prefer if can running on LVM , which i believe
> performance
> > > > shall be the best , compared localstroage where file-based.
> > > >
> > > > But facing issue of ISCSI is ShareMount point need Clustered File
> > > System,
> > > > otherwise you can only setup one Cluster one Host. Setting up
> > Cluster
> > > > File system is issue here, GFS2 is no more support on CentOS /
> > Redhat,
> > > > and there is bug in Ubuntu 18.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 6:54 PM Andrija Panic <
> andrija.panic@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > NFS is the rock-solid, and majority of users are using NFS, I can
> > tell
> > > > that
> > > > > for sure.
> > > > > Do understand there is some difference between cheap white-box NFS
> > > > solution
> > > > > and a proprietary $$$ NFS solution, when it comes to performance.
> > > > >
> > > > > Some users will use Ceph, some local disks (this is all KVM so far)
> > > > > VMware users might be heavy on iSCSI datastores,
> > > > >
> > > > > And that is probably true for 99% of ACS users - rest might be
> > > > > experimenting with clustered solutions via OCFS/GFS2 (shared
> > > mountpoint)
> > > > or
> > > > > Gluster etc - but that is all not really suitable for a serious
> > > > production
> > > > > usage IMO (usually,but there might be exceptions to this).
> > > > >
> > > > > SolidFire is also a $$$ solution that works very well, depending on
> > > your
> > > > > hypervisor (best integration so far I believe is with KVM in ACS).
> > > > >
> > > > > Hope that helps
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 04:50, Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > HI
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I just wonder what storage you all use for CloudStack ? And the
> > > number
> > > > > of
> > > > > > VM able to get spinned up for storage you use ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Can anybody share the experience ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > Hean Seng
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > > Andrija Panić
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Hean Seng
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Andrija Panić
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Hean Seng
> >
>
>
> --
> *Regards,*
> *Pratik Chandrakar*
> Scientist-C
> NIC - Chhattisgarh State Centre
> *Hall no.-AD2-14 ,* *2nd Floor *
> Mahanadi Bhavan , Mantralaya , New Raipur
>
--
Regards,
Hean Seng
Re: Cloudstack - What Storage you using ?
Posted by Pratik Chandrakar <ch...@gmail.com>.
Hi Andrija,
I have a similar requirement like Hean. So what's your recommendation for
HA with NFS/Local disk?
On Sat, Oct 10, 2020 at 8:55 AM Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Andrija
>
> I am planning on a high end hypervisor , AMD EYPCv2 7742 CPU that get
> 64core and 128thread , 384G RAM, etc , and multiple 10G card bnond or 40G
> card for storage network.
>
> On this kind of server, probably get up to 200 VM per hypervisor. I'm
> just afraid that NFS will create a bottleneck if the storage server is
> running a lower-end Hardware on storage.
>
> For ISCSI, normally won't be an issue of hardware cpu in storage server and
> it act almost like external hard disk, while NFS needs to process the file
> system in Storage.
>
> I had read through many articles, and mentioned GFS2 has many issues. I
> initially planned to run OCFS2, but it does not support REDHAT any more,
> and there is a bug on Ubuntu18 , not sure if solved. OCFS2 should be a lot
> more stable and less issue compare GFS2
>
> this is ocfs2 on ubuntu bug, which i am facing exactly the same.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-signed/+bug/1895010
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 6:41 PM Andrija Panic <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > free advice - try to avoid Clustered File Systems always - due to
> > complexity, and sometimes due to the utter lack of reliability (I had,
> > outside of ACS, an awful experience with GFS2, set by RedHat themself
> for a
> > former customer), etc - so Shared Mount point is to be skipped, if
> > possible.
> >
> > Local disks - there are some downsides to VM live migration - so make
> sure
> > to understand the limits and options.
> > iSCSI = same LUN attached to all KVM hosts = you again need Clustered
> File
> > System, and that will be, again, consumed as Shared Mount point.
> >
> > For NFS, you are on your own when it comes to the performance and
> tunning -
> > this is outside of ACS - usually no high CPU usage on a moderately used
> NFS
> > server.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 at 18:45, Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > For using NFS, do you have performance issue like Storage CPU getting
> > very
> > > high ? And i believe this could be cause the the filesystem is make
> at
> > > Storage instead of Compute Node.
> > >
> > > Thus i am thinking of is ISCSI or LocalStorage.
> > >
> > > For ISCSI, i prefer if can running on LVM , which i believe performance
> > > shall be the best , compared localstroage where file-based.
> > >
> > > But facing issue of ISCSI is ShareMount point need Clustered File
> > System,
> > > otherwise you can only setup one Cluster one Host. Setting up
> Cluster
> > > File system is issue here, GFS2 is no more support on CentOS /
> Redhat,
> > > and there is bug in Ubuntu 18.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 6:54 PM Andrija Panic <an...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > NFS is the rock-solid, and majority of users are using NFS, I can
> tell
> > > that
> > > > for sure.
> > > > Do understand there is some difference between cheap white-box NFS
> > > solution
> > > > and a proprietary $$$ NFS solution, when it comes to performance.
> > > >
> > > > Some users will use Ceph, some local disks (this is all KVM so far)
> > > > VMware users might be heavy on iSCSI datastores,
> > > >
> > > > And that is probably true for 99% of ACS users - rest might be
> > > > experimenting with clustered solutions via OCFS/GFS2 (shared
> > mountpoint)
> > > or
> > > > Gluster etc - but that is all not really suitable for a serious
> > > production
> > > > usage IMO (usually,but there might be exceptions to this).
> > > >
> > > > SolidFire is also a $$$ solution that works very well, depending on
> > your
> > > > hypervisor (best integration so far I believe is with KVM in ACS).
> > > >
> > > > Hope that helps
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 04:50, Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > HI
> > > > >
> > > > > I just wonder what storage you all use for CloudStack ? And the
> > number
> > > > of
> > > > > VM able to get spinned up for storage you use ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Can anybody share the experience ?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Hean Seng
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Andrija Panić
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > > Hean Seng
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Andrija Panić
> >
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Hean Seng
>
--
*Regards,*
*Pratik Chandrakar*
Scientist-C
NIC - Chhattisgarh State Centre
*Hall no.-AD2-14 ,* *2nd Floor *
Mahanadi Bhavan , Mantralaya , New Raipur
Re: Cloudstack - What Storage you using ?
Posted by Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com>.
Hi Andrija
I am planning on a high end hypervisor , AMD EYPCv2 7742 CPU that get
64core and 128thread , 384G RAM, etc , and multiple 10G card bnond or 40G
card for storage network.
On this kind of server, probably get up to 200 VM per hypervisor. I'm
just afraid that NFS will create a bottleneck if the storage server is
running a lower-end Hardware on storage.
For ISCSI, normally won't be an issue of hardware cpu in storage server and
it act almost like external hard disk, while NFS needs to process the file
system in Storage.
I had read through many articles, and mentioned GFS2 has many issues. I
initially planned to run OCFS2, but it does not support REDHAT any more,
and there is a bug on Ubuntu18 , not sure if solved. OCFS2 should be a lot
more stable and less issue compare GFS2
this is ocfs2 on ubuntu bug, which i am facing exactly the same.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-signed/+bug/1895010
On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 6:41 PM Andrija Panic <an...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> free advice - try to avoid Clustered File Systems always - due to
> complexity, and sometimes due to the utter lack of reliability (I had,
> outside of ACS, an awful experience with GFS2, set by RedHat themself for a
> former customer), etc - so Shared Mount point is to be skipped, if
> possible.
>
> Local disks - there are some downsides to VM live migration - so make sure
> to understand the limits and options.
> iSCSI = same LUN attached to all KVM hosts = you again need Clustered File
> System, and that will be, again, consumed as Shared Mount point.
>
> For NFS, you are on your own when it comes to the performance and tunning -
> this is outside of ACS - usually no high CPU usage on a moderately used NFS
> server.
>
> Best,
>
> On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 at 18:45, Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > For using NFS, do you have performance issue like Storage CPU getting
> very
> > high ? And i believe this could be cause the the filesystem is make at
> > Storage instead of Compute Node.
> >
> > Thus i am thinking of is ISCSI or LocalStorage.
> >
> > For ISCSI, i prefer if can running on LVM , which i believe performance
> > shall be the best , compared localstroage where file-based.
> >
> > But facing issue of ISCSI is ShareMount point need Clustered File
> System,
> > otherwise you can only setup one Cluster one Host. Setting up Cluster
> > File system is issue here, GFS2 is no more support on CentOS / Redhat,
> > and there is bug in Ubuntu 18.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 6:54 PM Andrija Panic <an...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > NFS is the rock-solid, and majority of users are using NFS, I can tell
> > that
> > > for sure.
> > > Do understand there is some difference between cheap white-box NFS
> > solution
> > > and a proprietary $$$ NFS solution, when it comes to performance.
> > >
> > > Some users will use Ceph, some local disks (this is all KVM so far)
> > > VMware users might be heavy on iSCSI datastores,
> > >
> > > And that is probably true for 99% of ACS users - rest might be
> > > experimenting with clustered solutions via OCFS/GFS2 (shared
> mountpoint)
> > or
> > > Gluster etc - but that is all not really suitable for a serious
> > production
> > > usage IMO (usually,but there might be exceptions to this).
> > >
> > > SolidFire is also a $$$ solution that works very well, depending on
> your
> > > hypervisor (best integration so far I believe is with KVM in ACS).
> > >
> > > Hope that helps
> > >
> > > On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 04:50, Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > HI
> > > >
> > > > I just wonder what storage you all use for CloudStack ? And the
> number
> > > of
> > > > VM able to get spinned up for storage you use ?
> > > >
> > > > Can anybody share the experience ?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Hean Seng
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Andrija Panić
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Hean Seng
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Andrija Panić
>
--
Regards,
Hean Seng
Re: Cloudstack - What Storage you using ?
Posted by Andrija Panic <an...@gmail.com>.
free advice - try to avoid Clustered File Systems always - due to
complexity, and sometimes due to the utter lack of reliability (I had,
outside of ACS, an awful experience with GFS2, set by RedHat themself for a
former customer), etc - so Shared Mount point is to be skipped, if possible.
Local disks - there are some downsides to VM live migration - so make sure
to understand the limits and options.
iSCSI = same LUN attached to all KVM hosts = you again need Clustered File
System, and that will be, again, consumed as Shared Mount point.
For NFS, you are on your own when it comes to the performance and tunning -
this is outside of ACS - usually no high CPU usage on a moderately used NFS
server.
Best,
On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 at 18:45, Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
> For using NFS, do you have performance issue like Storage CPU getting very
> high ? And i believe this could be cause the the filesystem is make at
> Storage instead of Compute Node.
>
> Thus i am thinking of is ISCSI or LocalStorage.
>
> For ISCSI, i prefer if can running on LVM , which i believe performance
> shall be the best , compared localstroage where file-based.
>
> But facing issue of ISCSI is ShareMount point need Clustered File System,
> otherwise you can only setup one Cluster one Host. Setting up Cluster
> File system is issue here, GFS2 is no more support on CentOS / Redhat,
> and there is bug in Ubuntu 18.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 6:54 PM Andrija Panic <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > NFS is the rock-solid, and majority of users are using NFS, I can tell
> that
> > for sure.
> > Do understand there is some difference between cheap white-box NFS
> solution
> > and a proprietary $$$ NFS solution, when it comes to performance.
> >
> > Some users will use Ceph, some local disks (this is all KVM so far)
> > VMware users might be heavy on iSCSI datastores,
> >
> > And that is probably true for 99% of ACS users - rest might be
> > experimenting with clustered solutions via OCFS/GFS2 (shared mountpoint)
> or
> > Gluster etc - but that is all not really suitable for a serious
> production
> > usage IMO (usually,but there might be exceptions to this).
> >
> > SolidFire is also a $$$ solution that works very well, depending on your
> > hypervisor (best integration so far I believe is with KVM in ACS).
> >
> > Hope that helps
> >
> > On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 04:50, Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > HI
> > >
> > > I just wonder what storage you all use for CloudStack ? And the number
> > of
> > > VM able to get spinned up for storage you use ?
> > >
> > > Can anybody share the experience ?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > > Hean Seng
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Andrija Panić
> >
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Hean Seng
>
--
Andrija Panić
Re: Cloudstack - What Storage you using ?
Posted by Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com>.
For using NFS, do you have performance issue like Storage CPU getting very
high ? And i believe this could be cause the the filesystem is make at
Storage instead of Compute Node.
Thus i am thinking of is ISCSI or LocalStorage.
For ISCSI, i prefer if can running on LVM , which i believe performance
shall be the best , compared localstroage where file-based.
But facing issue of ISCSI is ShareMount point need Clustered File System,
otherwise you can only setup one Cluster one Host. Setting up Cluster
File system is issue here, GFS2 is no more support on CentOS / Redhat,
and there is bug in Ubuntu 18.
On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 6:54 PM Andrija Panic <an...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> NFS is the rock-solid, and majority of users are using NFS, I can tell that
> for sure.
> Do understand there is some difference between cheap white-box NFS solution
> and a proprietary $$$ NFS solution, when it comes to performance.
>
> Some users will use Ceph, some local disks (this is all KVM so far)
> VMware users might be heavy on iSCSI datastores,
>
> And that is probably true for 99% of ACS users - rest might be
> experimenting with clustered solutions via OCFS/GFS2 (shared mountpoint) or
> Gluster etc - but that is all not really suitable for a serious production
> usage IMO (usually,but there might be exceptions to this).
>
> SolidFire is also a $$$ solution that works very well, depending on your
> hypervisor (best integration so far I believe is with KVM in ACS).
>
> Hope that helps
>
> On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 04:50, Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > HI
> >
> > I just wonder what storage you all use for CloudStack ? And the number
> of
> > VM able to get spinned up for storage you use ?
> >
> > Can anybody share the experience ?
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Hean Seng
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Andrija Panić
>
--
Regards,
Hean Seng
Re: Cloudstack - What Storage you using ?
Posted by Andrija Panic <an...@gmail.com>.
NFS is the rock-solid, and majority of users are using NFS, I can tell that
for sure.
Do understand there is some difference between cheap white-box NFS solution
and a proprietary $$$ NFS solution, when it comes to performance.
Some users will use Ceph, some local disks (this is all KVM so far)
VMware users might be heavy on iSCSI datastores,
And that is probably true for 99% of ACS users - rest might be
experimenting with clustered solutions via OCFS/GFS2 (shared mountpoint) or
Gluster etc - but that is all not really suitable for a serious production
usage IMO (usually,but there might be exceptions to this).
SolidFire is also a $$$ solution that works very well, depending on your
hypervisor (best integration so far I believe is with KVM in ACS).
Hope that helps
On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 at 04:50, Hean Seng <he...@gmail.com> wrote:
> HI
>
> I just wonder what storage you all use for CloudStack ? And the number of
> VM able to get spinned up for storage you use ?
>
> Can anybody share the experience ?
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Hean Seng
>
--
Andrija Panić