Hi Hieu, Will it be good to include bulk operation of this feature? In addition, does Xen support parallel execution of these operations ?
Regards, Amit *CloudByte Inc.* <http://www.cloudbyte.com/> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Hieu LE <hieul...@gmail.com> wrote: > Mike, Punith, > > Please review "Golden Primary Storage" proposal. [1] > > Thank you. > > [1]: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Golden+Primary+Storage > > > On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 10:32 PM, Mike Tutkowski < > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote: > >> Daan helped out with this. You should be good to go now. >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 8:50 PM, Hieu LE <hieul...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Hi Mike, >> > >> > Could you please give edit/create permission on ASF Jira/Wiki >> confluence ? >> > I can not add a new Wiki page. >> > >> > My Jira ID: hieulq >> > Wiki: hieulq89 >> > Review Board: hieulq >> > >> > Thanks ! >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:17 AM, Mike Tutkowski < >> > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com >> > > wrote: >> > >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > Yes, please feel free to add a new Wiki page for your design. >> > > >> > > Here is a link to applicable design info: >> > > >> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Design >> > > >> > > Also, feel free to ask more questions and have me review your design. >> > > >> > > Thanks! >> > > Mike >> > > >> > > >> > > On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Hieu LE <hieul...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > > Hi Mike, >> > > > >> > > > You are right, performance will be decreased over time because >> writes >> > > IOPS >> > > > will always end up on slower storage pool. >> > > > >> > > > In our case, we are using CloudStack integrated in VDI solution to >> > > provived >> > > > pooled VM type[1]. So may be my approach can bring better UX for >> user >> > > with >> > > > lower bootime ... >> > > > >> > > > A short change in design are followings >> > > > - VM will be deployed with golden primary storage if primary >> storage is >> > > > marked golden and this VM template is also marked as golden. >> > > > - Choosing the best deploy destionation for both golden primary >> storage >> > > and >> > > > normal root volume primary storage. Chosen host can also access both >> > > > storage pools. >> > > > - New Xen Server plug-in for modifying VHD parent id. >> > > > >> > > > Is there some place for me to submit my design and code. Can I >> write a >> > > new >> > > > proposal in CS wiki ? >> > > > >> > > > [1]: >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> http://support.citrix.com/proddocs/topic/xendesktop-rho/cds-choose-scheme-type-rho.html >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Mike Tutkowski < >> > > > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > It is an interesting idea. If the constraints you face at your >> > company >> > > > can >> > > > > be corrected somewhat by implementing this, then you should go for >> > it. >> > > > > >> > > > > It sounds like writes will be placed on the slower storage pool. >> This >> > > > means >> > > > > as you update OS components, those updates will be placed on the >> > slower >> > > > > storage pool. As such, your performance is likely to somewhat >> > decrease >> > > > over >> > > > > time (as more and more writes end up on the slower storage pool). >> > > > > >> > > > > That may be OK for your use case(s), though. >> > > > > >> > > > > You'll have to update the storage-pool orchestration logic to take >> > this >> > > > new >> > > > > scheme into account. >> > > > > >> > > > > Also, we'll have to figure out how this ties into storage tagging >> (if >> > > at >> > > > > all). >> > > > > >> > > > > I'd be happy to review your design and code. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 1:54 AM, Hieu LE <hieul...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks Mike and Punith for quick reply. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Both solutions you gave here are absolutely correct. But as I >> > > mentioned >> > > > > in >> > > > > > the first email, I want another better solution for current >> > > > > infrastructure >> > > > > > at my company. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Creating a high IOPS primary storage using storage tags is good >> but >> > > it >> > > > > will >> > > > > > be very waste of disk capacity. For example, if I only have 1TB >> SSD >> > > and >> > > > > > deploy 100 VM from a 100GB template. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > So I think about a solution where a high IOPS primary storage >> can >> > > only >> > > > > > store golden image (master image), and a child image of this VM >> > will >> > > be >> > > > > > stored in another normal (NFS, ISCSI...) storage. In this case, >> > with >> > > > 1TB >> > > > > > SSD Primary Storage I can store as much golden image as I need. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > I have also tested it with 256 GB SSD mounted on Xen Server >> 6.2.0 >> > > with >> > > > > 2TB >> > > > > > local storage 10000RPM, 6TB NFS share storage with 1GB network. >> The >> > > > IOPS >> > > > > of >> > > > > > VMs which have golden image (master image) in SSD and child >> image >> > in >> > > > NFS >> > > > > > increate more than 30-40% compare with VMs which have both >> golden >> > > image >> > > > > and >> > > > > > child image in NFS. The boot time of each VM is also decrease. >> > > ('cause >> > > > > > golden image in SSD only reduced READ IOPS). >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Do you think this approach OK ? >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Mike Tutkowski < >> > > > > > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks, Punith - this is similar to what I was going to say. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Any time a set of CloudStack volumes share IOPS from a common >> > pool, >> > > > you >> > > > > > > cannot guarantee IOPS to a given CloudStack volume at a given >> > time. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Your choices at present are: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > 1) Use managed storage (where you can create a 1:1 mapping >> > between >> > > a >> > > > > > > CloudStack volume and a volume on a storage system that has >> QoS). >> > > As >> > > > > > Punith >> > > > > > > mentioned, this requires that you purchase storage from a >> vendor >> > > who >> > > > > > > provides guaranteed QoS on a volume-by-volume bases AND has >> this >> > > > > > integrated >> > > > > > > into CloudStack. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > 2) Create primary storage in CloudStack that is not managed, >> but >> > > has >> > > > a >> > > > > > high >> > > > > > > number of IOPS (ex. using SSDs). You can then storage tag this >> > > > primary >> > > > > > > storage and create Compute and Disk Offerings that use this >> > storage >> > > > tag >> > > > > > to >> > > > > > > make sure their volumes end up on this storage pool (primary >> > > > storage). >> > > > > > This >> > > > > > > will still not guarantee IOPS on a CloudStack volume-by-volume >> > > basis, >> > > > > but >> > > > > > > it will at least place the CloudStack volumes that need a >> better >> > > > chance >> > > > > > of >> > > > > > > getting higher IOPS on a storage pool that could provide the >> > > > necessary >> > > > > > > IOPS. A big downside here is that you want to watch how many >> > > > CloudStack >> > > > > > > volumes get deployed on this primary storage because you'll >> need >> > to >> > > > > > > essentially over-provision IOPS in this primary storage to >> > increase >> > > > the >> > > > > > > probability that each and every CloudStack volume that uses >> this >> > > > > primary >> > > > > > > storage gets the necessary IOPS (and isn't as likely to suffer >> > from >> > > > the >> > > > > > > Noisy Neighbor Effect). You should be able to tell CloudStack >> to >> > > only >> > > > > > use, >> > > > > > > say, 80% (or whatever) of the storage you're providing to it >> (so >> > as >> > > > to >> > > > > > > increase your effective IOPS per GB ratio). This >> > over-provisioning >> > > of >> > > > > > IOPS >> > > > > > > to control Noisy Neighbors is avoided in option 1. In that >> > > situation, >> > > > > you >> > > > > > > only provision the IOPS and capacity you actually need. It is >> a >> > > much >> > > > > more >> > > > > > > sophisticated approach. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > > > Mike >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 11:36 PM, Punith S < >> > punit...@cloudbyte.com> >> > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > hi hieu, >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > your problem is the bottle neck we see as a storage vendors >> in >> > > the >> > > > > > cloud, >> > > > > > > > meaning all the vms in the cloud have not been guaranteed >> iops >> > > from >> > > > > the >> > > > > > > > primary storage, because in your case i'm assuming you are >> > > running >> > > > > > > 1000vms >> > > > > > > > on a xen cluster whose all vm's disks are lying on a same >> > primary >> > > > nfs >> > > > > > > > storage mounted to the cluster, >> > > > > > > > hence you won't get the dedicated iops for each vm since >> every >> > vm >> > > > is >> > > > > > > > sharing the same storage. to solve this issue in cloudstack >> we >> > > the >> > > > > > third >> > > > > > > > party vendors have implemented the plugin(namely cloudbyte , >> > > > > solidfire >> > > > > > > etc) >> > > > > > > > to support managed storage(dedicated volumes with guaranteed >> > qos >> > > > for >> > > > > > each >> > > > > > > > vms) , where we are mapping each root disk(vdi) or data disk >> > of a >> > > > vm >> > > > > > with >> > > > > > > > one nfs or iscsi share coming out of a pool, also we are >> > > proposing >> > > > > the >> > > > > > > new >> > > > > > > > feature to change volume iops on fly in 4.5, where you can >> > > increase >> > > > > or >> > > > > > > > decrease your root disk iops while booting or at peak times. >> > but >> > > to >> > > > > use >> > > > > > > > this plugin you have to buy our storage solution. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > if not , you can try creating a nfs share out of ssd pool >> > storage >> > > > and >> > > > > > > > create a primary storage in cloudstack out of it named as >> > golden >> > > > > > primary >> > > > > > > > storage with specific tag like gold, and create a compute >> > > offering >> > > > > for >> > > > > > > your >> > > > > > > > template with the storage tag as gold, hence all the vm's >> you >> > > > create >> > > > > > will >> > > > > > > > sit on this gold primary storage with high iops. and other >> data >> > > > disks >> > > > > > on >> > > > > > > > other primary storage but still here you cannot guarantee >> the >> > qos >> > > > at >> > > > > vm >> > > > > > > > level. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > thanks >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Hieu LE < >> hieul...@gmail.com> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Hi all, >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> There are some problems while deploying a large amount of >> VMs >> > in >> > > > my >> > > > > > > >> company >> > > > > > > >> with CloudStack. All VMs are deployed from same template >> (e.g: >> > > > > Windows >> > > > > > > 7) >> > > > > > > >> and the quantity is approximately ~1000VMs. The problems >> here >> > is >> > > > low >> > > > > > > IOPS, >> > > > > > > >> low performance of VM (about ~10-11 IOPS, boot time is very >> > > high). >> > > > > The >> > > > > > > >> storage of my company is SAN/NAS with NFS and Xen Server >> > 6.2.0. >> > > > All >> > > > > > Xen >> > > > > > > >> Server nodes have standard server HDD disk raid. >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> I have found some solutions for this such as: >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> - Enable Xen Server Intellicache and some tweaks in >> > > CloudStack >> > > > > > codes >> > > > > > > to >> > > > > > > >> deploy and start VM in Intellicache mode. But this >> solution >> > > > will >> > > > > > > >> transfer >> > > > > > > >> all IOPS from shared storage to all local storage, hence >> > > affect >> > > > > and >> > > > > > > >> limit >> > > > > > > >> some CloudStack features. >> > > > > > > >> - Buying some expensive storage solutions and network to >> > > > increase >> > > > > > > IOPS. >> > > > > > > >> Nah.. >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> So, I am thinking about a new feature that (may be) >> increasing >> > > > IOPS >> > > > > > and >> > > > > > > >> performance of VMs: >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> 1. Separate golden image in high IOPS partition: buying >> new >> > > > SSD, >> > > > > > plug >> > > > > > > >> in >> > > > > > > >> Xen Server and deployed a new VM in NFS storage WITH >> golden >> > > > image >> > > > > > in >> > > > > > > >> this >> > > > > > > >> new SSD partition. This can reduce READ IOPS in shared >> > > storage >> > > > > and >> > > > > > > >> decrease >> > > > > > > >> boot time of VM. (Currenty, VM deployed in Xen Server >> > always >> > > > > have a >> > > > > > > >> master >> > > > > > > >> image (golden image - in VMWare) always in the same >> storage >> > > > > > > repository >> > > > > > > >> with >> > > > > > > >> different image (child image)). We can do this trick by >> > > > tweaking >> > > > > in >> > > > > > > VHD >> > > > > > > >> header file with new Xen Server plug-in. >> > > > > > > >> 2. Create golden primary storage and VM template that >> > enable >> > > > this >> > > > > > > >> feature. >> > > > > > > >> 3. So, all VMs deployed from template that had enabled >> this >> > > > > feature >> > > > > > > >> will >> > > > > > > >> have a golden image stored in golden primary storage >> (SSD >> > or >> > > > some >> > > > > > > high >> > > > > > > >> IOPS >> > > > > > > >> partition), and different image (child image) stored in >> > other >> > > > > > normal >> > > > > > > >> primary storage. >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> This new feature will not transfer all IOPS from shared >> > storage >> > > to >> > > > > > local >> > > > > > > >> storage (because high IOPS partition can be another high >> IOPS >> > > > shared >> > > > > > > >> storage) and require less money than buying new storage >> > > solution. >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> What do you think ? If possible, may I write a proposal in >> > > > > CloudStack >> > > > > > > >> wiki ? >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> BRs. >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> Hieu Lee >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> -- >> > > > > > > >> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- >> > > > > > > >> Version: 3.1 >> > > > > > > >> GCS/CM/IT/M/MU d-@? s+(++):+(++) !a C++++(++++)$ >> > ULC++++(++)$ P >> > > > > > > >> L++(+++)$ E >> > > > > > > >> !W N* o+ K w O- M V- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+ t 5 X R tv+ >> b+(++)>+++ >> > DI- >> > > > D+ >> > > > > G >> > > > > > > >> e++(+++) h-- r(++)>+++ y- >> > > > > > > >> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > -- >> > > > > > > > regards, >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > punith s >> > > > > > > > cloudbyte.com >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- >> > > > > > > *Mike Tutkowski* >> > > > > > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* >> > > > > > > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com >> > > > > > > o: 303.746.7302 >> > > > > > > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud >> > > > > > > <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™* >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > -- >> > > > > > -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- >> > > > > > Version: 3.1 >> > > > > > GCS/CM/IT/M/MU d-@? s+(++):+(++) !a C++++(++++)$ ULC++++(++)$ P >> > > > > L++(+++)$ >> > > > > > E >> > > > > > !W N* o+ K w O- M V- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+ t 5 X R tv+ b+(++)>+++ DI- >> > D+ G >> > > > > > e++(+++) h-- r(++)>+++ y- >> > > > > > ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > -- >> > > > > *Mike Tutkowski* >> > > > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* >> > > > > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com >> > > > > o: 303.746.7302 >> > > > > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud >> > > > > <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™* >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- >> > > > Version: 3.1 >> > > > GCS/CM/IT/M/MU d-@? s+(++):+(++) !a C++++(++++)$ ULC++++(++)$ P >> > > L++(+++)$ >> > > > E >> > > > !W N* o+ K w O- M V- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+ t 5 X R tv+ b+(++)>+++ DI- D+ >> G >> > > > e++(+++) h-- r(++)>+++ y- >> > > > ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > *Mike Tutkowski* >> > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* >> > > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com >> > > o: 303.746.7302 >> > > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud >> > > <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™* >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- >> > Version: 3.1 >> > GCS/CM/IT/M/MU d-@? s+(++):+(++) !a C++++(++++)$ ULC++++(++)$ P >> L++(+++)$ >> > E >> > !W N* o+ K w O- M V- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+ t 5 X R tv+ b+(++)>+++ DI- D+ G >> > e++(+++) h-- r(++)>+++ y- >> > ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> *Mike Tutkowski* >> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* >> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com >> o: 303.746.7302 >> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud >> <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™* >> > > > > -- > -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- > Version: 3.1 > GCS/CM/IT/M/MU d-@? s+(++):+(++) !a C++++(++++)$ ULC++++(++)$ P L++(+++)$ > E !W N* o+ K w O- M V- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+ t 5 X R tv+ b+(++)>+++ DI- D+ G > e++(+++) h-- r(++)>+++ y- > ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ >
