<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Apr 30, 2018 at 2:01 PM, Eduardo Mayoral <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:emayoral@arsys.es" target="_blank">emayoral@arsys.es</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On 30/04/18 12:51, Tony Brian Albers wrote:<br>
> On 30/04/18 11:43, Eduardo Mayoral wrote:<br>
>> Hi,<br>
>><br>
>> I would like to set up a new oVirt deployment with hosts that have<br>
>> the VMs running on local attached storage. I understand this has the<br>
>> requirement of having each host in its own cluster (and own datacenter,<br>
>> it seems, I understand the need for the dedicated cluster, not so much<br>
>> for the dedicated datacenter).<br>
>><br>
>> At the same time, I would like to have some shared storage domains<br>
>> so I can use it to export VMs or migrate them around hosts (probably in<br>
>> three stages, first migrate VM storage from local to the shared storage<br>
>> domain, second migrate the host (probably not possible to do a "hot"<br>
>> migration, but at least "cold"), third migrate the VM storage from the<br>
>> shared storage domain to the local storage domain of the new host).<br>
>><br>
>> So I thought maybe I can deploy a datacenter in shared storage mode,<br>
>> with one cluster per host. Use one or two shared storage domains for<br>
>> master and as an stage area for planned VM migrations as explained<br>
>> before, and then configure several storage domains, one per host, as<br>
>> posix FS . I would then deploy the VMs on the local posix FS storage<br>
>> domains and set affinity rules for the VMs to their hosts as needed.<br>
>><br>
>> Would this work? Is there a better way of achieving local storage<br>
>> and retaining the ability to share storage among hosts and migrate VMs?<br>
>><br>
>><br>
> Have you thought about using glusterfs? If hosts are physically close, <br>
> that would probably be the best solution.<br>
><br>
<br>
</span>Actually, yes, I also had glusterfs in mind. However one of the main<br>
reasons to use local storage is performance, and I am concerned about<br>
the write latencies of gluster (If using gluster, I would handle things<br>
so the VM runs on one of the gluster nodes hosting the VM data, so I<br>
assume the read latency will be close to the one I would get with local<br>
storage, but the gluster replica(s) will be on other hosts, so write<br>
latency may be significantly worse).<br>
<br>
Thanks a lot for the suggestion, it is a good one, however, the original<br>
question stands: Would this work? Is there a better way of achieving<br>
<span class="">local storage and retaining the ability to share storage among hosts and<br>
migrate VMs?<br></span></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Hi Eduardo,</div><div>We support <span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:small;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial;float:none;display:inline">shared storage domains in a local data center since </span>oVirt 4.1.</div><div>Will this help you by any chance?</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">
<br>
</span>Best regards,<br>
<br>
--<br>
Eduardo Mayoral.<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Users@ovirt.org">Users@ovirt.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.ovirt.org/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/users</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>