<html><head><style>body{font-family:Helvetica,Arial;font-size:13px}</style></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial;font-size:13px; color: rgba(0,0,0,1.0); margin: 0px; line-height: auto;">Thank you for the insight and advice Jeremiah.</div><div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial;font-size:13px; color: rgba(0,0,0,1.0); margin: 0px; line-height: auto;"><br></div><div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial;font-size:13px; color: rgba(0,0,0,1.0); margin: 0px; line-height: auto;">I think that creating a base image on one machine and using puppet/scripting to create the others is a great idea (I’ve been using clonezilla and manually editing IP/hostname afterwards).</div><div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial;font-size:13px; color: rgba(0,0,0,1.0); margin: 0px; line-height: auto;"><br></div><div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial;font-size:13px; color: rgba(0,0,0,1.0); margin: 0px; line-height: auto;">As for not using overt, the aspects that I’d be missing are remotely rebooting a hung machine. Also, taking a snapshot of the entire guest is relatively easy/without reboot/started remotely.</div><div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial;font-size:13px; color: rgba(0,0,0,1.0); margin: 0px; line-height: auto;"><br></div><div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial;font-size:13px; color: rgba(0,0,0,1.0); margin: 0px; line-height: auto;">As for “Why Mini’s” we have a bunch of extra machines on hand and off lease.</div><div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial;font-size:13px; color: rgba(0,0,0,1.0); margin: 0px; line-height: auto;"><br></div><div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial;font-size:13px; color: rgba(0,0,0,1.0); margin: 0px; line-height: auto;">If anyone else has other thoughts and suggestions, please share.</div><div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial;font-size:13px; color: rgba(0,0,0,1.0); margin: 0px; line-height: auto;"><br></div><div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial;font-size:13px; color: rgba(0,0,0,1.0); margin: 0px; line-height: auto;">Thanks,</div><div id="bloop_customfont" style="font-family:Helvetica,Arial;font-size:13px; color: rgba(0,0,0,1.0); margin: 0px; line-height: auto;"><br></div> <div class="bloop_sign" id="bloop_sign_1405608152087044864"><span style="font-family:helvetica,arial;font-size:13px"></span>-- <br>urthmover</div> <br><p style="color:#000;">On July 17, 2014 at 9:04:12 AM, Jeremiah Jahn (<a href="mailto:jeremiah@goodinassociates.com">jeremiah@goodinassociates.com</a>) wrote:</p> <blockquote type="cite" class="clean_bq"><span><div><div></div><div>Just a couple of thoughts for you. You are correct. Gluster would not
<br>be a happy thing for for a DB. But for that matter, no network file
<br>system would be good for postgres or any DB. Your SSD's probably max
<br>out at 6Gb/s while your nics on a mini only go up to 1Gb/s. The whole
<br>point of postgres-xc is that it takes care of all of the replication
<br>and redundancy. Depending on your usage, your probably going to want
<br>all of the 16 GB of ram for your indexes as well. I'd be very tempted
<br>to make an install image from one mini and use it to add/create the
<br>other nodes with puppet or just a custom script to configure the image
<br>for addition to the pg-xc cluster. You're not going to gain a whole
<br>lot of anything by running ovirt on your mini's except some slowdown.
<br>if your servers that PG will be running on are linux, then you don't
<br>really need more than 10GB for a linux install. If you're going to
<br>use your mini's for other guests careful of the memory you use so you
<br>don't make your dba unhappy. and using gluster on the exported 100G
<br>partition would only net you about 500G for a storage domain if you've
<br>got gluster replication going, which is not a bad idea. And finally,
<br>why mac mini's? pretty pricey for server hardware unless your planning
<br>on using them to host osx guests, which I'm not sure can actually be
<br>done with anything but vmware, which is even a hack, at the moment.
<br>
<br>just my 2 cents as a person who runs gluster, ovirt, and a postgres cluster.
<br>
<br>On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 2:50 PM, urthmover <urthmover@gmail.com> wrote:
<br>> After further investigation and reading. Glusterfs is not really designed
<br>> for database operations. So I am retracting one question and curious about
<br>> anyone’s thoughts regrading the new set of questions.
<br>>
<br>> Should I partition the mirrored pair into two slices (100GB and 800GB).
<br>> Then present ovirt with 10 storage domains each being a 100G partition for
<br>> the OS of each guest. Then use nfs for the 800G /data partitions (not using
<br>> /data as a storage domain within overt, just as plain old nfs mounts hard
<br>> coded to each guest machine)
<br>>
<br>> Should I present each mac mini’s mirrored pair as an nfs share to
<br>> ovirt-engine? This would create 10 1TB storage domains. Then create 10
<br>> large 800GB /data partitions (a /data for each guest).
<br>>
<br>> Should I NOT use ovirt and just run each mac mini as a mirrored pair of
<br>> disks and a standalone server?
<br>>
<br>> --
<br>> urthmover
<br>>
<br>> On July 16, 2014 at 12:12:16 PM, urthmover (urthmover@gmail.com) wrote:
<br>>
<br>> I have 10 mac minis at my disposal. (Currently, I’m booting each device
<br>> using a centos6.5 usbstick leaving the 2 disks free for use)
<br>>
<br>> GOAL:
<br>> To build a cluster of 10 servers running postgres-xc
<br>>
<br>> EQUIPMENT:
<br>> 10 mac mini: i7-3720QM@2.60GHz/16G RAM/1x1gbit NIC/2x1TB SSDs (zfs
<br>> mirrored)
<br>>
<br>> REQUEST:
<br>> Please run the software application postgres-xc (a multi-master version of
<br>> postgres). I'm told by the DBA that disk IO is the most important factor
<br>> for the tasks that he’ll be running. The DBA wants 10 servers each with a
<br>> 50G OS partition and a 800GB /data.
<br>>
<br>> THOUGHTS:
<br>> I have a few ideas for how to accomplish but I'm unsure which is the best
<br>> balance between disk IO and overall IT management of the environment.
<br>>
<br>> QUESTIONS FOR THE LIST:
<br>> Should I present each of the 10 mac mini’s mirrored disks to glusterfs thus
<br>> creating a large 10TB storage area. Then connect the storage area to
<br>> ovirt-engine creating on 10TB storage domain, and use it as the storage
<br>> domain for 10 large 800GB disks (a /data for each guest) ?
<br>>
<br>> Should I present each mac mini’s mirrored pair as an nfs share to
<br>> ovirt-engine? This would create 10 1TB storage domains. Then create 10
<br>> large 800GB /data partitions (a /data for each guest).
<br>>
<br>> Should I NOT use ovirt and just run each mac mini as a mirrored pair of
<br>> disks and a sandalone server?
<br>>
<br>> LASTLY:
<br>> I’m open to any other thoughts or ideas for how to best accomplish this
<br>> task.
<br>>
<br>> Thanks in advance,
<br>>
<br>> --
<br>> urthmover
<br>>
<br>>
<br>> _______________________________________________
<br>> Users mailing list
<br>> Users@ovirt.org
<br>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
<br>>
<br></div></div></span></blockquote></body></html>