Proposing a new infra design

[Kiril Nesenko]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden" <ewoud+ovirt at kohlvanwijngaarden.nl>
> To: infra at ovirt.org
> Sent: Sunday, June 9, 2013 1:33:54 PM
> Subject: Re: Proposing a new infra design
> 
> On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 02:40:02AM -0400, Kiril Nesenko wrote:
> > I would like to propose a new design for our infrastructure.
> 
> First of all, I'm happy to revisit this. Inline are some comments that
> explain why some choices were made and some thoughts.
> 
> > Today we have some bare metal hosts:
> >
> > USA
> > rackspace01.ovirt.org - f18 clean
> > rackspace02.ovirt.org - f18 clean
> >
> >
> > France
> > alterway01.ovirt.org - jenkins.ovirt.org
> > alterway02.ovirt.org - all-in-one (that run few our services like
> > puppet,foreman etc.)
> >
> > I think that it make no sense to install all-in-one setups with local
> > storage domains on our bare metal hosts.  It will be better to install
> > NFS or ISCSI DCs per location. For example we can use amazon VMs as
> > engines and bare metal hosts as hypervisors.
> >
> > This is the design that I propose:
> >
> > amazon vm1(engine) USA -
> >                    |
> >                    |- rackspace01.ovirt.org
> >                    |- rackspace02.ovirt.org
> >
> > amazon vm2(engine) France -
> >                    |
> >                    |- alterway01.ovirt.org
> >                    |- alterway02.ovirt.org
> 
> I do like the idea of one more than one host per ovirt environment. HA
> is really something we should have for some services.
> 
> The reason we installed jenkins on a phyiscal host was partly based on
> that we just needed a new jenkins master and had little time to make our
> optimal environment. We also said that we could re-evaluate that choice
> at a later time.
> 
> Regarding the amazon engines: don't you need some layer 2 networking
> between the manager and the hosts? Wouldn't a VM at rackspace be much
> better as an engine because of lower latency? Maybe rackspace can just
> provide a VLAN between the engine and hosts which should make our
> management much easier? Maybe we can try to achieve a similar situation
> at Alterway?

If would be great !

> 
> > - Storage
> > * For this design we need storage services that will be located in the
> >   same DCs as our bare metal hosts.
> 
> Could we use gluster where possible? At alterway for example. For
> rackspace I'd prefer local storage per node, but I'll get to that later.

gluster is a possible solution, but for gluster we still need external storage.
Why do you want to use a local storage :) ?

> 
> > * Also we will need a storage for our backups - today we don't have a
> >   defined location for our backups.
> 
> Amazon S3 maybe?

Possible. We just need a place where we can save our backups.

> 
> > * Storage for resources.ovirt.org - make no sense that VM stores RPMs
> >   on it. Much better to use a VM with a small HD and use external
> >   storage for storing RPMs.
> 
> I don't quite understand this. I get that you'd want different
> partitions, but why external storage? Whether the host manages this or
> the guest, does it really make a difference?
> 
> When we get our environment up, I'd like to look into setting up mirrors
> where people/orgs can sponsor some mirror so resources.ovirt.org becomes
> less important anyway. yum has a nice mirrorlist feature and I'm sure we
> can work something out.

I am not sure on which servers resources.ovirt.org is running right now, but I would 
like to run our infra on our servers. For this purpose its better to create a VMs with a small HD and use ext. storage
to save RPMs on it.

> 
> > All services/Vms from alterway02 will be exported to USA DC using NFS
> > export domain.
> > USA DC will be used for production machines.
> > France DC will be used for jenkins slaves.
> 
> One thing you're forgetting is that the rackspace machines are faster.
> The fast local storage (SSD on one, 10k RPM SAS on the other IIRC),
> newer CPUs with more cores and more RAM make them much better candidates
> for jenkins slaves. That's why I think we should them as hosts for
> jenkins slaves with local storage for the slaves on rackspace.
> 
> That also means we should keep using alterway as our production
> environemnt but because of that I'd really like a pair of ovirt hosts to
> make it HA. In these times we shouldn't have to announce downtime
> because we need to upgrade the kernel on one of our hosts for example.

I wasn't aware of rackspace specs. Sounds good to me :).

> _______________________________________________
> Infra mailing list
> Infra at ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
>