xen-users
Re: R: [Xen-users] XCP and Openfiler as the storage
Hi,
thanks for your answer, however that raised another question.
I have several hypervisors, which means if I create one big LUN, I
will need different servers to have access to the same LUN and as far
as I know iSCSI LUNs are not supposed to be shared. Obviously, within
that same LUN, each hypervisor would be accessing different Logical
Volumes, but in case a new LV or a new snapshot is created, it would
have to allocate space from the LUN and that could lead to a scenario
where the other hypervisors do not see the new LV or the new snapshot.
Have you encountered this kind of problem, or do you have a different
scenario (perhaps only one hypervisor for the big LUN for example)?
Best regards,
Eduardo.
On Apr 5, 2011, at 1:24 PM, <cluster@xxxxxxxx> <cluster@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Eduardo,
I am using this scenario (openfiler + XCP) from more than 1 year. I
have had
no performance loss but my openfiler is patched for using
fibrechannel.
I suggest you to create only a big LUN (less than 2TB remember) and
let XCP
manage it.
Best regards,
FG
-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Per conto di Eduardo
Bragatto
Inviato: sabato 2 aprile 2011 16:46
A: xen-users
Oggetto: [Xen-users] XCP and Openfiler as the storage
Hi,
I have been using Xen under CentOS and Openfiler as the storage for
a while
now, however with the release of RHEL6 without support for Xen and
with the
release of XCP 1.0, I have the impression it's time to move away
from CentOS
and give XCP a try.
My greatest doubt is about LVM. Openfiler handles an entire RAID10
volume
which is exported as smaller volumes created through LVM via iSCSI.
However,
XCP also uses LVM to manage snapshots and such.
I believe if I start using XCP with my current storage server
(Openfiler), I
will end up with two layers of LVM -- first a volume on Openfiler
which is
exported via iSCSI, and then a new LVM layer created on top of the
LUN I
will import via iSCSI on XCP.
How bad (performance-wise) would be to have two layers of LVM? Would
it be
too complicated to maintain? (I imagine it would be as simple as
dealing
with the same thing twice, but there's also XCP handling LVM, so I'm
not
sure how that would work out).
Does anyone here has similar experiences they can share?
I know Openfiler does not have an API for integration with other
appliances,
so I believe XCP would not be able to create and manipulate the LVM
directly
on the Openfiler storage in order to avoid the two layers on top of
each
other. Does anyone if that kind of integration is doable, or even
possible?
Best regards,
Eduardo Bragatto
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
|
|