Thank you very much.

What about "direct lun" usage and database example?

2017-06-08 16:40 GMT+02:00 Elad Ben Aharon <ebenahar@redhat.com>:

Hi, 

Answer inline

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Stefano Bovina <bovy89@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,

does a storage best practise document for oVirt exist?

Some examples:

oVirt allows to extend an existing storage domain: Is it better to keep a 1:1 relation between LUN and oVirt storage domain?

What do you mean by 1:1 relation? Between storage domain and the number of LUNs the domain reside on? 

If not, is it better to avoid adding LUNs to an already existing storage domain?

No problems with storage domain extension.

Following the previous questions:

Is it better to have 1 Big oVirt storage domain or many small oVirt storage domains?

Depends on your needs, be aware to the following:

- Each domain has its own metadata which allocates ~5GB of the domain size.

- Each domain is being constatntly monitored by the system, so large number of domain can decrease the system performance.

There are also downsides with having big domains, like less flexability   

There is a max num VM/disks for storage domain?

In which case is it better to use "direct attached lun" with respect to an image on an oVirt storage domain? 

 

Example:

Simple web server:   ----> image

Large database (simple example):

   - root,swap etc: 30GB  ----> image?

   - data disk: 500GB    -----> (direct or image?)

Regards,

Stefano

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users