--_000_DM5PR01MB2506D11EEF39BD88516359ECFFCC0DM5PR01MB2506prod_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, 4 SSDs in "distributed replica 2" volume for VM images, with additional 20 = HDDs in another volume. We had some minor XFS issues with the HDDs volume. as for monitoring, standard snmp with few scripts to read smart report, we'= re still looking for a better way to monitor Gluster. hardware is Cisco UCS C220. We have another setup but not HC, and its equipped with 96 SSDs only. No major issues so far. -- Respectfully Mahdi A. Mahdi ________________________________ From: ovirt@fateknollogee.com <ovirt@fateknollogee.com> Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 4:45:30 PM To: Mahdi Adnan Cc: Barak Korren; Yaniv Kaul; Ovirt Users Subject: Re: [ovirt-users] Hardware for Hyperconverged oVirt: Gluster stora= ge best practice Mahdi, Can you share some more detail on your hardware? How many total SSDs? Have you had any drive failures? How do you monitor for failed drives? Was it a problem replacing failed drives? On 2017-06-11 02:21, Mahdi Adnan wrote:
Hi,
In our setup, we used each SSD as a standalone brick "no RAID" and created distributed replica with sharding.
Also, we are NOT managing Gluster from ovirt.
--
Respectfully MAHDI A. MAHDI
-------------------------
FROM: users-bounces@ovirt.org <users-bounces@ovirt.org> on behalf of Barak Korren <bkorren@redhat.com> SENT: Sunday, June 11, 2017 11:20:45 AM TO: Yaniv Kaul CC: ovirt@fateknollogee.com; Ovirt Users SUBJECT: Re: [ovirt-users] Hardware for Hyperconverged oVirt: Gluster storage best practice
On 11 June 2017 at 11:08, Yaniv Kaul <ykaul@redhat.com> wrote:
I will install the o/s for each node on a SATADOM. Since each node will have 6x SSD for gluster storage. Should this be software RAID, hardware RAID or no RAID?
I'd reckon that you should prefer HW RAID on software RAID, and some
RAID on
no RAID at all, but it really depends on your budget, performance, and your availability requirements.
Not sure that is the best advice, given the use of Gluster+SSDs for hosting individual VMs.
Typical software or hardware RAID systems are designed for use with spinning disks, and may not yield any better performance on SSDs. RAID is also not very good when I/O is highly scattered as it probably is when running multiple different VMs.
So we are left with using RAID solely for availability. I think Gluster may already provide that, so adding additional software or hardware layers for RAID may just degrade performance without providing any tangible benefits.
I think just defining each SSD as a single Gluster brick may provide the best performance for VMs, but my understanding of this is theoretical, so I leave it to the Gluster people to provide further insight.
-- Barak Korren RHV DevOps team , RHCE, RHCi Red Hat EMEA redhat.com | TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED. | redhat.com/trusted _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
--_000_DM5PR01MB2506D11EEF39BD88516359ECFFCC0DM5PR01MB2506prod_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <html> <head> <meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dus-ascii"=
<meta name=3D"Generator" content=3D"Microsoft Exchange Server"> <!-- converted from text --><style><!-- .EmailQuote { margin-left: 1pt; pad= ding-left: 4pt; border-left: #800000 2px solid; } --></style> </head> <body> <meta content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUTF-8"> <style type=3D"text/css" style=3D""> <!-- p {margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0} --> </style> <div dir=3D"ltr"> <div id=3D"x_divtagdefaultwrapper" dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"font-size:12pt; col= or:#000000; font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif"> <p>Hi,</p> <p><br> </p> <p>4 SSDs in "distributed replica 2" volume for VM images, with a= dditional 20 HDDs in another volume.</p> <p>We had some minor XFS issues with the HDDs volume.</p> <p>as for monitoring, standard snmp with few scripts to read smart report, = we're still looking for a better way to monitor Gluster.</p> <p>hardware is Cisco UCS C220.</p> <p><br> </p> <p>We have another setup but not HC, and its equipped with 96 SSDs only.</p=
<p>No major issues so far.</p> <p><br> </p> <div id=3D"x_Signature"><br> <div class=3D"x_ecxmoz-signature">-- <br> <br> <font color=3D"#3366ff"><font color=3D"#000000">Respectfully<b><br> </b><b>Mahdi A. Mahdi</b></font></font><font color=3D"#3366ff"><br> <br> </font><font color=3D"#3366ff"></font></div> </div> </div> <hr tabindex=3D"-1" style=3D"display:inline-block; width:98%"> <div id=3D"x_divRplyFwdMsg" dir=3D"ltr"><font face=3D"Calibri, sans-serif" = color=3D"#000000" style=3D"font-size:11pt"><b>From:</b> ovirt@fateknollogee= .com <ovirt@fateknollogee.com><br> <b>Sent:</b> Sunday, June 11, 2017 4:45:30 PM<br> <b>To:</b> Mahdi Adnan<br> <b>Cc:</b> Barak Korren; Yaniv Kaul; Ovirt Users<br> <b>Subject:</b> Re: [ovirt-users] Hardware for Hyperconverged oVirt: Gluste= r storage best practice</font> <div> </div> </div> </div> <font size=3D"2"><span style=3D"font-size:10pt;"> <div class=3D"PlainText">Mahdi,<br> <br> Can you share some more detail on your hardware?<br> How many total SSDs?<br> Have you had any drive failures?<br> How do you monitor for failed drives?<br> Was it a problem replacing failed drives?<br> <br> On 2017-06-11 02:21, Mahdi Adnan wrote:<br> > Hi,<br> > <br> > In our setup, we used each SSD as a standalone brick "no RAID&quo= t; and<br> > created distributed replica with sharding.<br> > <br> > Also, we are NOT managing Gluster from ovirt.<br> > <br> > --<br> > <br> > Respectfully<br> > MAHDI A. MAHDI<br> > <br> > -------------------------<br> > <br> > FROM: users-bounces@ovirt.org <users-bounces@ovirt.org> on behal= f of<br> > Barak Korren <bkorren@redhat.com><br> > SENT: Sunday, June 11, 2017 11:20:45 AM<br> > TO: Yaniv Kaul<br> > CC: ovirt@fateknollogee.com; Ovirt Users<br> > SUBJECT: Re: [ovirt-users] Hardware for Hyperconverged oVirt: Gluster<= br> > storage best practice<br> > <br> > On 11 June 2017 at 11:08, Yaniv Kaul <ykaul@redhat.com> wrote:<b= r> >> <br> >>> I will install the o/s for each node on a SATADOM.<br> >>> Since each node will have 6x SSD for gluster storage.<br> >>> Should this be software RAID, hardware RAID or no RAID?<br> >> <br> >> I'd reckon that you should prefer HW RAID on software RAID, and so= me<br> > RAID on<br> >> no RAID at all, but it really depends on your budget, performance,= <br> > and your<br> >> availability requirements.<br> >> <br> > <br> > Not sure that is the best advice, given the use of Gluster+SSDs fo= r<br> > hosting individual VMs.<br> > <br> > Typical software or hardware RAID systems are designed for use with<br=
> spinning disks, and may not yield any better performance on SSDs. RAID= <br> > is also not very good when I/O is highly scattered as it probably is<b= r> > when running multiple different VMs.<br> > <br> > So we are left with using RAID solely for availability. I think<br> > Gluster may already provide that, so adding additional software or<br> > hardware layers for RAID may just degrade performance without<br> > providing any tangible benefits.<br> > <br> > I think just defining each SSD as a single Gluster brick may provide<b= r> > the best performance for VMs, but my understanding of this is<br> > theoretical, so I leave it to the Gluster people to provide further<br=
> insight.<br> > <br> > --<br> > Barak Korren<br> > RHV DevOps team , RHCE, RHCi<br> > Red Hat EMEA<br> > redhat.com | TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED. | redhat.com/trusted<br> > _______________________________________________<br> > Users mailing list<br> > Users@ovirt.org<br> > <a href=3D"http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users">http://lists= .ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users</a><br> </div> </span></font> </body> </html> --_000_DM5PR01MB2506D11EEF39BD88516359ECFFCC0DM5PR01MB2506prod_--