Lev, That's exactly what I thought; you hit all the points (including slow DOM SATA I type performance vs. USB3 speeds). That's all I needed clarification on, before running down the rabbit hole. MM ------------------------------ *From:* Lev Veyde <lveyde(a)redhat.com&gt; *Sent:* Monday, June 26, 2017 4:00 PM *To:* Michael McConachie *Cc:* users(a)ovirt.org *Subject:* Re: [ovirt-users] oVirt Live USB3 question Hi Michael, oVirt-Live's basically functions as any other LiveCD, so no special differences here. Generally it means that necessary kernel/kernel modules/programs are loaded into RAM, and access to the image is needed if e.g. one wants to run some more programs. All writes are done into RAM. Note however that since the whole CD isn't copied into RAM, so you still need it to be accessible, e.g. have the USB DOK be inserted into the computer. As you already mentioned the oVirt-Live is designed to work in a sandboxed environment as far as the network is concerned. It was never designed nor tested to work with i.e. external storages, as in order to do so the network configuration will have to be modified. Regarding performance: we haven't tested it, but probably the oVirt-Live may take a bit more time to load when compared to normal installation. This is because USB DOKs are generally slower than SAS/SATA HDDs/SSDs. Once loaded however the performance will be similar and in some cases even greater, since all writes are done to the RAM. The price of this is of course that once the system is rebooted for whatever reason all data is lost. Hope it helped, On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 5:10 AM, Michael McConachie < michael.mcconachie(a)hotmail.com&gt; wrote: > Hi all, > > > Potentially stupid question here. Sorry in advance if so. I have always > built out full blown multi rack instances of oVirt, and RHEV for clients, > but the following question has me wondering before I go digging and trying > it out... > > > I realize that the oVirtLive ISO is for demo purposes, sandboxing, and > not production: I have a client, who is in need of a bootable AIO-based USB > install with the caveat of being able to connect to the computer's HD and > other external storage at that point (for the Storage and ISO domains that > I'll create afterwards). This is because they have one BM to work with and > they don't want the extra overhead using an SSD HD slot. They don't want to > use a Sata DOM either if possible. > > In saying that, and concerning the oVirt LiveISO capabilities - I have > two questions. > > > - Does the AIO USB install load necessary runtimes into memory, similar > to esxi bootable USBs and utilize the base hardware afterwards so that the > rest of the operations are ran in memory, hitting the disk (USB in this > case) like a normal OS load when needed for kernel calls, etc..?? > > - Are there a terrible performance costs if we stay with USB3 (which has > a ridiculous theoretical speed in certain hardware matching situations)? > > > Thanks in advance for anyone who might have already crossed this bridge > and can provide insight. > > > > Michael J. McConachie | keys.fedoraproject.org | PubKey: 0x7BCD88F8 > > *NOTE: The information included and/or attached in this electronic mail > transmission may contain confidential or privileged information and is > intended solely for the addressee(s). Any unauthorized disclosure, > reproduction, distribution or the taking of action in reliance on the **contents > of the information are strictly prohibited. If you have received the > message in error, please notify the sender by reply transmission and delete > the message without copying, disclosing or forwarding.* > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users(a)ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > -- Lev Veyde Software Engineer, RHCE | RHCVA | MCITP Red Hat Israel <https://www.redhat.com> lev(a)redhat.com | lveyde(a)redhat.com <https://red.ht/sig> TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED. <https://redhat.com/trusted>