Best Practice Question: How many engines, one or more than one, for multiple physical locations
Hello all, I read with Gluster using hyper-convergence that the engine must reside on the same LAN as the nodes. I guess this makes sense by definition - ie: using Gluster storage and replicating Gluster bricks across the web sounds awful. This got me wondering about best practices for the engine setup. We have multiple physical locations (co-location data centers). In my initial plan I had expected to have my oVirt engine hosted separately from each physical location so that in the event of trouble at a remote facility the engine would still be usable. In this case, our prod sites would not have a "hyper-converged" setup if we decide to run GlusterFS for storage at any particular physical site, but I believe it would still be possible to use Gluster. In this case oVirt would have a 3 node cluster, using GlusterFS storage, but not hyper-converged since the engine would be in a separate facility. Is there any downside in this setup to having the engine off-site? Rather than having an off-site engine, should I consider one engine per physical co-location space? Thank you all for any feedback, Matt
On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 9:50 PM, Matt Simonsen <matt@khoza.com> wrote:
Hello all,
I read with Gluster using hyper-convergence that the engine must reside on the same LAN as the nodes. I guess this makes sense by definition - ie: using Gluster storage and replicating Gluster bricks across the web sounds awful.
This got me wondering about best practices for the engine setup. We have multiple physical locations (co-location data centers).
In my initial plan I had expected to have my oVirt engine hosted separately from each physical location so that in the event of trouble at a remote facility the engine would still be usable.
In this case, our prod sites would not have a "hyper-converged" setup if we decide to run GlusterFS for storage at any particular physical site, but I believe it would still be possible to use Gluster. In this case oVirt would have a 3 node cluster, using GlusterFS storage, but not hyper-converged since the engine would be in a separate facility.
Is there any downside in this setup to having the engine off-site?
This is called a stretched cluster setup. You have pro and cons, for instance host fencing could become problematic. VM leases could help: https://ovirt.org/develop/release-management/features/storage/vm-leases/
Rather than having an off-site engine, should I consider one engine per physical co-location space?
This would be simpler but you are going to loose a few capabilities that can be relevant in a disaster recovery scenario.
Thank you all for any feedback,
Matt
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
participants (2)
-
Matt Simonsen -
Simone Tiraboschi