[one-users] Datastore choice + Scenario

[Rodolfo Conte Brufatto]

Thank you Ruben,
I did that way you just described earlier this week this new setup.
My environment will grow and i am have some particularities on it as well,
even the storage thing.

I am doing some customizations for my needs pontually, but also I have
found some people in the list that faecd some issues like mine regarding an
OpenFlow based network.

Again, thanks for the heads up, it was exactly what I got, was tyring to
avoid some erroneous setup for a near future.

Cheers.

On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 6:07 PM, Ruben S. Montero
<rsmontero at opennebula.org>wrote:

> Hi Rodolfo
>
> Yes  you email was posted in the right place ;)
>
> Some thoughts, inlined....
>
> >
> > My main concern is, is it possible to have multiple datastore types
> inside
> > the cluster (like adding future nodes to act as storage or any other
> NAS/SAN
> > device?)
> > Is there a good way to use this set up looking for future upgrades in
> terms
> > of resources?
>
> Yes it is possible to have multiple storage backends, that was the
> main reason to introduce the datastore abstraction.
>
> In order to ease the upgrade to add more datastores (even of the same
> type, e.g. you buy a new NAS server and want to use both NFS
> datastores), I'd recommend not to mount/export the whole
> var/lib/one/datastore/ directory, but just the each datastore
> directory individually.
>
> For example if you have an image datastore (e.g. 100), export
> /var/lib/one/datastore/100 in your NFS server (that directory will be
> the datastore storage area) and mount that under
> /var/lib/one/datastore/100 in the hosts. For 3.6, do not mount it
> elsewhere and link it there (there is a bug solved in 3.8). And the
> same for the system datastore 0 (take a look at this picture [1]).
> Note that the system datastore only needs to be added to the hosts
> that run VMs.
>
> [1]
> http://opennebula.org/_detail/documentation:rel3.4:fs_shared.png?id=documentation%3Arel3.6%3Afs_ds
>
> >
> > *Other point, the other reason i am asking in which one to use is: Is it
> > possible to extend the created LVs on the fly without compromising the
> > running instance?
> > Regarding that performance is not a big concern right now.
>
> This would need some hacking, Take a look at
>
>
> http://lists.opennebula.org/pipermail/users-opennebula.org/2012-September/020357.html
>
> >
> > I hope I was a little bit concise in here. :)
> > I am stuck in a crossroad in which datastore type to use and any advice,
> > insight or tip would be very welcome and very helpful!
>
> For your simple setup I'd recommend to go for the FS datastore, using
> NFS. The details in the documentation should be enough to set up this
> [2,3], but come back if you need more help
>
> [2] System datastore: http://opennebula.org/documentation:rel3.6:system_ds
> [3] FS Datastore: http://opennebula.org/documentation:rel3.6:fs_ds
>
>
> Good Luck
>
> Best
>
> Ruben
> >
> > Thanks in advance!
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > --
> > Have you tried turning it off and on again?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Users mailing list
> > Users at lists.opennebula.org
> > http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org
> >
>
> --
> Ruben S. Montero, PhD
> Project co-Lead and Chief Architect
> OpenNebula - The Open Source Solution for Data Center Virtualization
> www.OpenNebula.org | rsmontero at opennebula.org | @OpenNebula
>



-- 
Have you tried turning it off and on again?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opennebula.org/pipermail/users-opennebula.org/attachments/20121004/060023b5/attachment-0002.htm>