[one-users] File system performance testing suite tailored to OpenNebula

[Carlo Daffara]

As for the second part of the question, having a single filesystem helps in reducing the copy cost.
We have moved from the underlying FS to a distributed fs that does r/w snapshots, and changed the tm scripts to convert
copies into snapshot operations, so we have a little bit more flexibility in managing the filesystems and stores.
cheers
carlo daffara
cloudweavers

----- Messaggio originale -----
Da: "Gerry O'Brien" <gerry at scss.tcd.ie>
A: "Users OpenNebula" <users at lists.opennebula.org>
Inviato: Mercoledì, 11 settembre 2013 13:16:52
Oggetto: [one-users] File system performance testing suite tailored to	OpenNebula

Hi,

     Are there any recommendations for a file system performance testing 
suite tailored to OpenNebula typical workloads? I would like to compare 
the performance of zfs v. ext4. One of the reasons for considering zfs 
is that it allows replication to a remote site using snapshot streaming. 
Normal nightly backups, using something like rsync, are not suitable for 
virtual machine images where a single block change means the whole image 
has to be copied. The amount of change is to great.

     On a related issue, does it make sense to have datastores 0 and 1 
in a single files system so that the instantiations of non-persistent 
images does not require a copy from one file system to another? I have 
in mind the case where the original image is a qcow2 image.

         Regards,
             Gerry

-- 
Gerry O'Brien

Systems Manager
School of Computer Science and Statistics
Trinity College Dublin
Dublin 2
IRELAND

00 353 1 896 1341

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users at lists.opennebula.org
http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org