Re: [one-users] Performance with system datastore on NFS

2013-12-03 Thread Jaime Melis
Hi Daniel,

choosing the adequate CACHE option will definitely help. See:
http://opennebula.org/documentation:rel4.4:template#disks_section
http://libvirt.org/formatdomain.html#elementsDevices (look for cache)

cheers,
Jaime


On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Daniel Dehennin 
daniel.dehen...@baby-gnu.org wrote:

 Hello,

 I just finalize the migration our 3.8.3 ONE to 4.2 and was forced to
 change my plan to put datastore 0 on NFS4 because of slow accesses.

 For non persistent images they use local datastore 0, but persistent
 ones use NFS (via the symlink).

 All my images are qcow2.

 I have a dedicated VLAN for storage access, and my nodes are mounting
 the datastores as:

 10.255.255.2:/one-datastores on /var/lib/one/datastores type nfs4
 (rw,relatime,vers=4,rsize=262144,wsize=262144,namlen=255,hard,proto=tcp,port=0,timeo=600,retrans=2,sec=sys,clientaddr=10.255.255.4,minorversion=0,fsc,local_lock=none,addr=10.255.255.2,_netdev)

 I remember seeing a document about different cache scenarios and
 performance but I can not remember where.

 My setup is a tree nodes ONE:

 - one not very powerfull frontend
 - two quite powerful nodes to run VMs (core i7 + 16Go RAM)

 My storage is what they call “workgroup NAS” with dual gigabit nics
 configured in bonding.

 I'm wondering about using RAID1+0 instead of the RAID5 to improve disk
 access performances and lower CPU usage.

 Any hints or idea?

 Regards.

 --
 Daniel Dehennin
 Récupérer ma clef GPG:
 gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 0x7A6FE2DF

 ___
 Users mailing list
 Users@lists.opennebula.org
 http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org




-- 
Jaime Melis
C12G Labs - Flexible Enterprise Cloud Made Simple
http://www.c12g.com | jme...@c12g.com

--

Confidentiality Warning: The information contained in this e-mail and
any accompanying documents, unless otherwise expressly indicated, is
confidential and privileged, and is intended solely for the person
and/or entity to whom it is addressed (i.e. those identified in the
To and cc box). They are the property of C12G Labs S.L..
Unauthorized distribution, review, use, disclosure, or copying of this
communication, or any part thereof, is strictly prohibited and may be
unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us
immediately by e-mail at ab...@c12g.com and delete the e-mail and
attachments and any copy from your system. C12G's thanks you for your
cooperation.
___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opennebula.org
http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org


[one-users] Performance with system datastore on NFS

2013-11-20 Thread Daniel Dehennin
Hello,

I just finalize the migration our 3.8.3 ONE to 4.2 and was forced to
change my plan to put datastore 0 on NFS4 because of slow accesses.

For non persistent images they use local datastore 0, but persistent
ones use NFS (via the symlink).

All my images are qcow2.

I have a dedicated VLAN for storage access, and my nodes are mounting
the datastores as:

10.255.255.2:/one-datastores on /var/lib/one/datastores type nfs4 
(rw,relatime,vers=4,rsize=262144,wsize=262144,namlen=255,hard,proto=tcp,port=0,timeo=600,retrans=2,sec=sys,clientaddr=10.255.255.4,minorversion=0,fsc,local_lock=none,addr=10.255.255.2,_netdev)

I remember seeing a document about different cache scenarios and
performance but I can not remember where.

My setup is a tree nodes ONE:

- one not very powerfull frontend
- two quite powerful nodes to run VMs (core i7 + 16Go RAM)

My storage is what they call “workgroup NAS” with dual gigabit nics
configured in bonding.

I'm wondering about using RAID1+0 instead of the RAID5 to improve disk
access performances and lower CPU usage.

Any hints or idea?

Regards.

-- 
Daniel Dehennin
Récupérer ma clef GPG:
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 0x7A6FE2DF


pgpXQ2K0JUWS7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Users mailing list
Users@lists.opennebula.org
http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org