WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-users

Re: [Xen-users] High Number of VMs

To: Christian Motschke <christian@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] High Number of VMs
From: Bart Coninckx <bart.coninckx@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 11:14:32 +0200
Cc: Ciro Iriarte <cyruspy@xxxxxxxxx>, John Madden <jmadden@xxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-users list <xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 02:15:31 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <60AA7423-C605-4DB9-AEA1-DAD8E889456D@xxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-users@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <CAEaLa5F=T-M2tFYrVjpoSF820b_YsyFX3pFSUMBheJdOxj5xxg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4E6A8A4D.7050204@xxxxxxxxxxx> <CAEaLa5GppzZ9CyC=uQSu677F78O4fk_MhHGJwY0hpAOfEfU4Mg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4E6F7739.7010809@xxxxxxxxxxx> <60AA7423-C605-4DB9-AEA1-DAD8E889456D@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.20) Gecko/20110804 SUSE/3.1.12 Thunderbird/3.1.12
On 09/14/11 10:11, Christian Motschke wrote:

Am 13.09.2011 um 17:31 schrieb John Madden:

Any advantage on using large luns+LVM instead of independent LUNs
appart from snapshots? (according to Novell support LVM on top of LVM
is a bad thing...). I remember reading that Xen itself implements some
kind of locking...

I think easier management is the key.  If you're already managing the SAN and 
assigning LUNs to your boxen, then managing multipath.conf across your cluster, 
it's nice to only do that 4 times for a couple TB rather than once for each VM, 
for example.

I just want to add, what the iscsi-SCST guys suggest (from 
http://scst.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/scst/trunk/iscsi-scst/README?revision=3852&view=markup)

4. If you are going to use your target in an VM environment, for
instance as a shared storage with VMware, make sure all your VMs
connected to the target via *separate* sessions, i.e. each VM has own
connection to the target, not all VMs connected using a single
connection. You can check it using SCST proc or sysfs interface. If you
miss it, you can greatly loose performance of parallel access to your
target from different VMs. This isn't related to the case if your VMs
are using the same shared storage, like with VMFS, for instance. In this
case all your VM hosts will be connected to the target via separate
sessions, which is enough.

Hi,

would this translate into using a seperate iSCSI target for each VM versus a seperate iSCSI LUN?

thx,


B.

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>