Clayton, Thank you for the links and the analysis. It was very helpful and greatly appreciated.
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 6:18 PM, Clayton Weise <cwe...@iswest.net> wrote: > Chris, I'll start by referencing some additional reading from others > discussions on this topic: > > http://markmail.org/message/d3wg7ll7xzio76qc > > http://markmail.org/message/fqj3wmg55qb44ssh > > Pretty much anything involving Mike Tutkowski is centered around the topic > of individual LUNs per VM since it's one of the very cool and unique > features of SolidFire (per-volume QoS). Edison has been re-working much of > the underlying storage architecture within CS to allow for this type of > configuration. > > Next regarding Gluster as primary storage, in my experience with it this > hasn't ever turned out very good. Performance usually suffers and KVM and > CloudStack don't seem to do too well with it but my experience is a little > over 6 months old at this point and I'm sure things have changed since then > so I'd welcome anybody else to chime in. Personally I think you might be > better served to look at what Wido is doing with Ceph/RBD and CS as it > seems a more promising scale-out system, but that's just my personal > opinion based on what I have observed from others and not from my own > testing. > > Finally, as for what others are doing. For us, we are using iSCSI but we > share a LUN with multiple customers. So a given LUN might have many > smaller volumes on it belonging to a diverse number of accounts. This is > due to some technical limitations (256 LUNs per VM host), as well as the > logistical ones of managing the LUN sprawl which can get messy. In that > vein NFS is a very popular alternative. For various reasons (most of them > unfounded in my opinion) there seems to be a bias against NFS saying that > performance suffers. NFS performs extremely well under most circumstances > and is much easier to manage since it's just files on a filesystem. I > spend quite a bit of time in IRC and I can say from my time in there that > NFS is generally the most popular choice, and primarily for this reason. > > -Clayton > > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Mutchler [mailto:ch...@leibnizcreations.com] > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 10:12 AM > To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org > Subject: iSCSI mounts and primary storage > > I am in the designing phase of creating a private cloud using CloudStack. > The current portion I am focusing my efforts on is the primary storage > design. I could use an iSCSI SAN as the primary storage, but if I do so is > it possible for CloudStack to create/use individual LUN for each VM as > opposed to a single LUN for the cluster? > > The other primary storage solution I am looking at is using GlusterFS. It > appears to be another good solution for creating a private cloud with > expandability and high-availability functionality in mind. > > What have other users decided for their primary storage devices and what > suggestions do you have for someone designing a private cloud solution? > > Thank you in advance for you time. > -- > Chris Mutchler > ch...@leibnizcreations.com > -- Chris Mutchler ch...@leibnizcreations.com
