Perry,
I am glad you brought this up.
I 'd be perfectly happy to run the root fs entirely in RAM. In fact that would be
ideal for me. It's just I am not quite sure how to use pxeboot to achieve this.
I am doing a test now using the tftpboot files created from the iso.
As far as I see, the kernel boot options (pxelinux.cfg/default) has:
root=live:/ovirt-node-image-2.2.2-1.1.fc16.iso
With this I can only pxeboot to the intall screen. What should I use to let the kernel
mount the root fs in memory? Something like root=/dev/ram0?
David
-----Original Message-----
From: Perry Myers [mailto:pmyers@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 2:54 PM
To: Mike Burns
Cc: Li, David; users(a)ovirt.org
Subject: Re: [Users] Pxeboot
On 02/08/2012 05:03 PM, Mike Burns wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-02-08 at 13:46 -0800, Li, David wrote:
>> Mike,
>>
>> If I understand this correctly, today I should be able to pxeboot and
>> nfs mount the root fs from a remote server. Apart from setting up
>> the pxe stuff, I 'd have to populate the ovirt node root fs on the
>> server
>> - perhaps steal it from a disk install. In other words I am
>> concerned about the point from which the kernel starts to execute
>> /init script (in the initramfs) to the point /init is able to mount
>> the final root fs from a remote server.
>
> No, there is no way to set this up currently in ovirt-node. You could
> install using a remote iscsi lun if you have a hardware iscsi HBA, but
> there isn't a way to mount a remote nfs share as the root fs.
>
> Supporting a remote NFS share as the root fs isn't even something that
> requested as an RFE at this point or on the roadmap as far as I'm
> aware.
>
> It sounds like what you're really looking for is a shared root fs that
> multiple hosts could use. This is something that we will probably
> look into eventually, but it's not on the immediate roadmap.
Given that the rootfs of oVirt Node is fairly small and in a truly stateless
environment would just run out of system RAM, there's no real reason to try
to do a shared NFS based rootfs. It's an unnecessary complication I think, if
the end goal is to move to truly stateless.
For larger systems where the rootfs is on the order of GB's, shared root may
make more sense.