[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-users] Xen storage, Server with iSCSI or dedicated SAN?



thank you all. This could solve also the export/import iSCSI on same host issue, and avoid me mixed environments (on the host exporting iSCSI).

Were can I found a comparison between AoE / FC / iSCSI without starting a flame on AoE vs. iSCSI? ... well a comparison more recent than past discussion available on xen-users list, e.g., at:

http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-users/2007-07/msg00121.html
http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-users/2006-06/msg00285.html
http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-users/2006-05/msg00670.html
http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-users/2006-05/msg00323.html

or external, like:

http://storagearchitect.blogspot.com/2007/04/aoefcoeiscsi.html

It would be a good idea to have a FAQ, a sort of "product matrix" where XEN products are associated with different storage technologies, or, I see it would be easier, a collection of "Use cases" where one can compare its own scenario with other's scenarios.

Well, it could be misleading for a detailed scenario, but useful to take first directions, to find a place where XEN guys officially say something like "if you have from 1 to N VMs you need X core, Y gigs RAM and at least this kind of storage....where if you have more than N you should go for..." or, maybe "...the required disk bandwidth for Z XEN VMs working at, let say, 50% of load (consider the most common, LAMP servers) on a single host is.... "...

how can I tell without knowing in details XEN performances if a storage solution vs another one will be scalable enough?

hard to say....

thank you anyway!

        Ivan


Tom Mornini wrote:
I'd suggesting looking into Coraid's AoE products.

I'm nothing more than a very satisfied user of their products.

But then that's what it's all about, right? :-)

-- -- Tom Mornini, CTO
-- Engine Yard, Ruby on Rails Hosting
-- Support, Scalability, Reliability
-- (866) 518-YARD (9273) x201

On Aug 21, 2007, at 8:43 AM, Ivan Porro wrote:

Hi all,

I'm trying to configuring a setup where I will have 1 DELL PE1950 with 2 QC Xeon 5335, 8GB ram and a HP DL380G3 with 2 Xeon 3GHz and 2GB ram and Xen OSS or XenExpress v4, hosting RHEL4 and Windows VMs.

The problem is on the storage side. Since I'm really low on budget, I've to skip fiber channel and go for one of this two reasonable iSCSI options:

1)
SAN solution:  with a DELL/EMC2 AX150 iSCSI, single controller

2)
NAS solution: another server, a PE2950 configured with 2 QC Xeon 5320, 8GB ram and Xeon OSS or XenExpress v4 again, acting as a iSCSI target for himself and the other server. It will host also a LTO2 backup library, probably DELL PV124T


What are the real performance benefits of the SAN in this case? The SAN was intended to be not entirely dedicated to XEN. If I go for a server based SAN, it will (directly or via a VM) provide storage via NFS/SAMBA to other hosts

Well, of course, you may have also option (3) and (4)... that probably I missed... any help is appreciated

thank you in advance

    ivan





--http://www.bio.dist.unige.it
voice: +39 010 353 2789
fax:   +39 010 353 2948

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



--
http://www.bio.dist.unige.it
voice: +39 010 353 2789
fax:   +39 010 353 2948

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


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.