cloudstack-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mads Nordholm <m...@nordholm.dk>
Subject Re: Hardware question
Date Tue, 03 Mar 2015 13:20:32 GMT
Very useful input indeed. I think I might end up going with a more
conventional setup for starters, and then play with CEPH on the site. And
that then leads to another question: Does anybody have some input on what
RAID level to use for a more conventional storage setup? I am looking at
deploying a setup that exclusively uses SSD, so I am probably a bit more
interested in getting as many usable GBs as possible, than I am in
optimising I/O.

So far, I have been hearing people advocating RAID 10 as well as RAID 6. I
am personally leaning towards RAID 6, but I would love to get some input
from someone with more experience using these different RAID levels in
production.

--
Mads Nordholm

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 7:34 PM, Vadim Kimlaychuk <Vadim.Kimlaychuk@elion.ee>
wrote:

> Andrija,
>
>         This is my choise already -- FreeBSD + ZFS with SSD for ZIL/L2ARC
> cache + NFS.  Going to be at production within couple of weeks. You have
> read my thoughts ! :)
>
> Vadim.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrija Panic [mailto:andrija.panic@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 2:25 PM
> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Hardware question
>
> I'm personaly having fights with CEPh used for Primary storage - I ike
> CEPH VERY MUCH, but hate it at the same time (hars word, I know...)
>
> For Primary storage - my suggestions, play arround if you like, but avoid
> it at the end...till it matures better, or simply the integration with CEPH
> matures better.
>
> If you are not using 10G network and serious hardware - it's crappy
> experience... SSD for Journal, etc...
>
> It's a fight  - whenever I do some maintance on CEPH I end up swetting,
> clients asking why is everythgin so slow, etc...
>
> For our next cloud, I'm going with ZFS/NFS definitively...
>
> Be warned :)
>
> Cheers
>
> On 3 March 2015 at 13:15, Vadim Kimlaychuk <Vadim.Kimlaychuk@elion.ee>
> wrote:
>
> > Mads,
> >
> >         CEPH is good indeed, but keep in mind that you should really
> > be expert at this type of SDS. There are points that are not visible
> > from the first look and may bring some unpleasent surprises.  For
> example: "default"
> > option for storage I have tested was to make snapshots automatically
> > from the files being saved to primary storage. As a consequence when
> > you delete VM there are artifacts (snapshots) that are connect to
> > deleted VM not being deleted by Cloudstack (since CS does not know they
> exist).
> >                Another point - you can't directly use it as secondary
> > storage. Need to set-up application server and run RadosGW.
> > Performance - is a big question mark here. You need NFS or iSCSI anyway.
> >         What we haven't fully tested - disaster recovery or
> > malfunction simulation. You must know how to recover from all types of
> > the faults. It is very easy to lose everything by just doing wrong
> > things (or in wrong order).  From my point of view Ceph is rather
> > complex to start together with CS. It may be easy to set up, but not so
> easy to manage.
> >         Will suggest you to run it like a year at development to make
> > yourself confident you can manage it.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Vadim.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mads Nordholm [mailto:mads@nordholm.dk]
> > Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 8:16 PM
> > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Hardware question
> >
> > Thanks a lot for your answer, Lucian. CEPH sounds like a very
> > interesting solution. I will have to do some more research on that.
> >
> > --
> > Mads Nordholm
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 12:32 AM, Nux! <nux@li.nux.ro> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Mads,
> > >
> > > Imo, if you want that flexibility you should go with non-local storage.
> > > CEPH is a popular choice here, but you will need 10 Gbps between
> > > hypervisors and storage servers if you want reasonable performance.
> > > So, if you need more storage just add more CEPH servers. Need more
> > > compute, add more hypervisors.
> > >
> > > HTH
> > > Lucian
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> > >
> > > Nux!
> > > www.nux.ro
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Mads Nordholm" <mads@nordholm.dk>
> > > > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > > Sent: Monday, 2 March, 2015 17:19:40
> > > > Subject: Hardware question
> > >
> > > > I am planning a small Cloudstack setup (using KVM for
> > > > virtualisation)
> > > that
> > > > will allow me to run roughly 100 VPSs with these average
> requirements:
> > > >
> > > > - 1 core
> > > > - 512 MB RAM
> > > > - 20 GB SSD
> > > >
> > > > I am interested in input regarding a hardware configuration that
> > > > will support this, and how to best build a small setup that will
> > > > scale easily
> > > as
> > > > I grow. Within a year or so, I expect to have more than 1,000
> > > > guest
> > > running.
> > > >
> > > > I basically need a setup that will not completely break the bank
> > > > as I
> > > start
> > > > out, but also one that will scale well as I grow. I am
> > > > particularly concerned with being able to add only the resources I
> > > > need. If I need
> > > more
> > > > storage, I want to be able to add only that (preferably just by
> > > > adding disks to a RAID array), and if I need more computing power,
> > > > I want to be able to add only that.
> > > >
> > > > Any input greatly appreciated.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Mads Nordholm
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> Andrija Panić
>

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