[Users] taking advantage of extra disk space on nodes
--Sig_/3JPaVh0uh3olCd4JN0DHdY. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable So I've got a handful of oVirt nodes now, and most of them have over 100G of unallocated disk space. I'm trying to figure out how to best take advantage of that space. I see two possibilities: storage for oVirt, or backup/archive storage. I'm currently using a single NFS server for VM/iso/export storage (oVirt 3.3.x on CentOS, if it matters) and don't need to scale to hundreds of nodes (probably 10-20, max). Is current gluster support stable enough for production? What are the pros/cons of gluster vs NFS? I like the idea of not having a single point of failure but worry about performance. The other option is to stick with my NFS server and use the extra storage for archive/backup space. Here I'm looking for reliability (i.e. losing a server won't cause data loss) over performance. Are there pros/cons to gluster vs ceph? Will either/both peacefully co-exist with an ovirt node? All suggestions welcomed. Thanks! Robert -- Senior Software Engineer @ Parsons --Sig_/3JPaVh0uh3olCd4JN0DHdY. Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlL7s+4ACgkQ7/fVLLY1mnibhACdG71a26MblaQDyH9QcxMIKcof 1KYAn3GMiX0/YsATe2JMGB1LH0st6RwF =Nq/0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/3JPaVh0uh3olCd4JN0DHdY.--
AFAIK gluster on the same node as vdsm is not supported and may lead to problems. I don't know if this statement still holds true for ovirt 3.4, though. Maybe someone with more gluster experience can elaborate on this? Am 12.02.2014 18:48, schrieb Robert Story:
So I've got a handful of oVirt nodes now, and most of them have over 100G of unallocated disk space. I'm trying to figure out how to best take advantage of that space. I see two possibilities: storage for oVirt, or backup/archive storage.
I'm currently using a single NFS server for VM/iso/export storage (oVirt 3.3.x on CentOS, if it matters) and don't need to scale to hundreds of nodes (probably 10-20, max). Is current gluster support stable enough for production? What are the pros/cons of gluster vs NFS? I like the idea of not having a single point of failure but worry about performance.
The other option is to stick with my NFS server and use the extra storage for archive/backup space. Here I'm looking for reliability (i.e. losing a server won't cause data loss) over performance. Are there pros/cons to gluster vs ceph? Will either/both peacefully co-exist with an ovirt node?
All suggestions welcomed. Thanks!
-- Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Regards Sven Kieske Systemadministrator Mittwald CM Service GmbH & Co. KG Königsberger Straße 6 32339 Espelkamp T: +49-5772-293-100 F: +49-5772-293-333 https://www.mittwald.de Geschäftsführer: Robert Meyer St.Nr.: 331/5721/1033, USt-IdNr.: DE814773217, HRA 6640, AG Bad Oeynhausen Komplementärin: Robert Meyer Verwaltungs GmbH, HRB 13260, AG Bad Oeynhausen
participants (2)
-
Robert Story -
Sven Kieske