Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Pavel Gashev]

On Tue, 2017-04-18 at 17:19 +, Nir Soffer wrote:
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:23 AM Pavel Gashev 
mailto:p...@acronis.com>> wrote:

Nir,

A process can chdir into mount point and then lazy umount it. Filesystem 
remains mounted while the process exists and current directory is on mounted 
filesystem.

# struncate -s 1g masterfs.img
# mkfs.ext4 masterfs.img
# mkdir masterfs
# mount -o loop masterfs.img masterfs
# cd masterfs
# umount -l .
# touch file
# ls
# cd ..
# ls masterfs

Interesting idea!

The only issue I see if not having a way to tell if the file system was actually
unmounted. Does process termination guarantee that the file system was
unmounted?

You can double check that by deactivating underlying LV. It should not be busy.

As I understand it unmounts FS as soon as all inodes are closed. Since killing 
of process is closing all open inodes, you can be sure that file system is 
unmounted if there are no other processes. Of course this is a place for race 
conditions. For example, unmounting can be stuck some time if underlying 
storage is unresponsive. Multipath should drop all IOs with EIO. VDSM has to 
wait enough time after acquiring the lock before mounting masterfs.

Do you know if the behaviour is documented somewhere?

umount(8):

-l, --lazy
Lazy unmount.  Detach the filesystem from the filesystem hierarchy now, and 
cleanup all references to the filesystem as soon as it is not busy anymore.  
(Requires kernel 2.4.11 or later.)


___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Nir Soffer]

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:23 AM Pavel Gashev  wrote:

> Nir,
>
> A process can chdir into mount point and then lazy umount it. Filesystem
> remains mounted while the process exists and current directory is on
> mounted filesystem.
>
> # struncate -s 1g masterfs.img
> # mkfs.ext4 masterfs.img
> # mkdir masterfs
> # mount -o loop masterfs.img masterfs
> # cd masterfs
> # umount -l .
> # touch file
> # ls
> # cd ..
> # ls masterfs
>
Interesting idea!

The only issue I see if not having a way to tell if the file system was
actually
unmounted. Does process termination guarantee that the file system was
unmounted?

Do you know if the behaviour is documented somewhere?

Nir


>
> --
> *From:* Nir Soffer 
> *Sent:* Apr 17, 2017 8:40 PM
> *To:* Adam Litke; Pavel Gashev
> *Cc:* users
>
> *Subject:* Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt
>
> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 6:54 PM Adam Litke  wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Pavel Gashev  wrote:
>>
>>> Adam,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> You know, Sanlock has recovery mechanism that kills VDSM, or even
>>> triggers Watchdog to reboot SPM host in case it has lost the SPM lock.
>>>
>>> I’m asking because I had issues with my master storage that caused SPM
>>> host to reboot by Watchdog. And I was sure that it’s an intended behaviour.
>>> Isn’t it?
>>>
>>
>> Yes of course.  But an SPM host can fail but still maintain its
>> connection to the storage lease.  In this case still you need classic
>> fencing.
>>
>> Something new we are investigating is the use of sanlock's request
>> feature which allows a new host to take the lease away from the current
>> holder.  The current holder would be fenced by sanlock (watchdog if
>> necessary) and only once the lease is free would it be granted to the new
>> requester.
>>
>
> We can use the SPM lease to kill vdsm on the non-responsive SPM host,
> and start the SPM on another host, similar to the way we handle vms with
> a lease.
>
> But this does not help with the masterfs mounted on the SPM host. if vdsm
> is killed before it unmount it, strating the SPM on another host (and
> mounting
> the msasterfs on the new host) will corrupt the masterfs.
>
> When using file based storage (nfs, glusterfs) we don't have a masterfs so
> killing vdsm on the SPM should be good enough to start the SPM on another
> host, even if fencing is not possible.
>
> We can start with enabling sanlock based SPM fencing on file based storage.
>
> Nir
>
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From: *Adam Litke 
>>> *Date: *Monday, 17 April 2017 at 17:32
>>> *To: *Pavel Gashev 
>>> *Cc: *Nir Soffer , users 
>>>
>>> *Subject: *Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Pavel Gashev  wrote:
>>>
>>> Nir,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Isn’t SPM managed via Sanlock? I believe there is no need to fence SPM
>>> host. Especially if there are no SPM tasks running.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It's true that the exclusivity of the SPM role is enforced by Sanlock
>>> but you always need to fence a non-responsive SPM because there is no way
>>> to guarantee that the host is not still manipulating storage (eg. LV
>>> extensions) and we must ensure that only one host has the masterfs on the
>>> master storage domain mounted.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From: * on behalf of Nir Soffer <
>>> nsof...@redhat.com>
>>> *Date: *Monday, 17 April 2017 at 16:06
>>> *To: *Konstantin Raskoshnyi , Dan Yasny <
>>> dya...@gmail.com>
>>> *Cc: *users , FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>>> fernando.fredi...@upx.com>
>>> *Subject: *Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 8:24 AM Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> But actually, it didn't work well. After main SPM host went down I see
>>> this
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2017-04-17 05:23:15,554Z ERROR
>>> [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
>>> (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM Init:
>>> could not find reported vds or not up - poo

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Pavel Gashev]

Nir,

A process can chdir into mount point and then lazy umount it. Filesystem 
remains mounted while the process exists and current directory is on mounted 
filesystem.

# struncate -s 1g masterfs.img
# mkfs.ext4 masterfs.img
# mkdir masterfs
# mount -o loop masterfs.img masterfs
# cd masterfs
# umount -l .
# touch file
# ls
# cd ..
# ls masterfs


From: Nir Soffer 
Sent: Apr 17, 2017 8:40 PM
To: Adam Litke; Pavel Gashev
Cc: users
Subject: Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 6:54 PM Adam Litke 
mailto:ali...@redhat.com>> wrote:
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Pavel Gashev 
mailto:p...@acronis.com>> wrote:
Adam,

You know, Sanlock has recovery mechanism that kills VDSM, or even triggers 
Watchdog to reboot SPM host in case it has lost the SPM lock.
I’m asking because I had issues with my master storage that caused SPM host to 
reboot by Watchdog. And I was sure that it’s an intended behaviour. Isn’t it?

Yes of course.  But an SPM host can fail but still maintain its connection to 
the storage lease.  In this case still you need classic fencing.

Something new we are investigating is the use of sanlock's request feature 
which allows a new host to take the lease away from the current holder.  The 
current holder would be fenced by sanlock (watchdog if necessary) and only once 
the lease is free would it be granted to the new requester.

We can use the SPM lease to kill vdsm on the non-responsive SPM host,
and start the SPM on another host, similar to the way we handle vms with
a lease.

But this does not help with the masterfs mounted on the SPM host. if vdsm
is killed before it unmount it, strating the SPM on another host (and mounting
the msasterfs on the new host) will corrupt the masterfs.

When using file based storage (nfs, glusterfs) we don't have a masterfs so
killing vdsm on the SPM should be good enough to start the SPM on another
host, even if fencing is not possible.

We can start with enabling sanlock based SPM fencing on file based storage.

Nir




From: Adam Litke mailto:ali...@redhat.com>>
Date: Monday, 17 April 2017 at 17:32
To: Pavel Gashev mailto:p...@acronis.com>>
Cc: Nir Soffer mailto:nsof...@redhat.com>>, users 
mailto:users@ovirt.org>>

Subject: Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt



On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Pavel Gashev 
mailto:p...@acronis.com>> wrote:
Nir,

Isn’t SPM managed via Sanlock? I believe there is no need to fence SPM host. 
Especially if there are no SPM tasks running.

It's true that the exclusivity of the SPM role is enforced by Sanlock but you 
always need to fence a non-responsive SPM because there is no way to guarantee 
that the host is not still manipulating storage (eg. LV extensions) and we must 
ensure that only one host has the masterfs on the master storage domain mounted.



From: mailto:users-boun...@ovirt.org>> on behalf of 
Nir Soffer mailto:nsof...@redhat.com>>
Date: Monday, 17 April 2017 at 16:06
To: Konstantin Raskoshnyi mailto:konra...@gmail.com>>, Dan 
Yasny mailto:dya...@gmail.com>>
Cc: users mailto:users@ovirt.org>>, FERNANDO FREDIANI 
mailto:fernando.fredi...@upx.com>>
Subject: Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 8:24 AM Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
mailto:konra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
But actually, it didn't work well. After main SPM host went down I see this


2017-04-17 05:23:15,554Z ERROR 
[org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy] (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) 
[4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM Init: could not find reported vds or 
not up - pool: 'STG' vds_spm_id: '1'
2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z INFO  
[org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy] (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) 
[4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM selection - vds seems as spm 'tank5'
2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z WARN  
[org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy] (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) 
[4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] spm vds is non responsive, stopping spm 
selection.

So that means only if BMC is up it's possible to automatically switch  SPM host?

BMC?

If your SPM is no responsive, the system will try to fence it. Did you
configure power management for all hosts? did you check that it
work? How did you simulate non-responsive host?

If power management is not configured or fail, the system cannot
move the spm to another host, unless you manually confirm that the
SPM host was rebooted.

Nir


Thanks

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
mailto:konra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Oh, fence agent works fine if I select ilo4,
Thank you for your help!

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:22 PM Dan Yasny 
mailto:dya...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
mailto:konra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Makes sense.
I was trying to set it up, but do

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Nir Soffer]

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 6:54 PM Adam Litke  wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Pavel Gashev  wrote:
>
>> Adam,
>>
>>
>>
>> You know, Sanlock has recovery mechanism that kills VDSM, or even
>> triggers Watchdog to reboot SPM host in case it has lost the SPM lock.
>>
>> I’m asking because I had issues with my master storage that caused SPM
>> host to reboot by Watchdog. And I was sure that it’s an intended behaviour.
>> Isn’t it?
>>
>
> Yes of course.  But an SPM host can fail but still maintain its connection
> to the storage lease.  In this case still you need classic fencing.
>
> Something new we are investigating is the use of sanlock's request feature
> which allows a new host to take the lease away from the current holder.
> The current holder would be fenced by sanlock (watchdog if necessary) and
> only once the lease is free would it be granted to the new requester.
>

We can use the SPM lease to kill vdsm on the non-responsive SPM host,
and start the SPM on another host, similar to the way we handle vms with
a lease.

But this does not help with the masterfs mounted on the SPM host. if vdsm
is killed before it unmount it, strating the SPM on another host (and
mounting
the msasterfs on the new host) will corrupt the masterfs.

When using file based storage (nfs, glusterfs) we don't have a masterfs so
killing vdsm on the SPM should be good enough to start the SPM on another
host, even if fencing is not possible.

We can start with enabling sanlock based SPM fencing on file based storage.

Nir


>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Adam Litke 
>> *Date: *Monday, 17 April 2017 at 17:32
>> *To: *Pavel Gashev 
>> *Cc: *Nir Soffer , users 
>>
>> *Subject: *Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Pavel Gashev  wrote:
>>
>> Nir,
>>
>>
>>
>> Isn’t SPM managed via Sanlock? I believe there is no need to fence SPM
>> host. Especially if there are no SPM tasks running.
>>
>>
>>
>> It's true that the exclusivity of the SPM role is enforced by Sanlock but
>> you always need to fence a non-responsive SPM because there is no way to
>> guarantee that the host is not still manipulating storage (eg. LV
>> extensions) and we must ensure that only one host has the masterfs on the
>> master storage domain mounted.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: * on behalf of Nir Soffer <
>> nsof...@redhat.com>
>> *Date: *Monday, 17 April 2017 at 16:06
>> *To: *Konstantin Raskoshnyi , Dan Yasny <
>> dya...@gmail.com>
>> *Cc: *users , FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>> fernando.fredi...@upx.com>
>> *Subject: *Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 8:24 AM Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
>> wrote:
>>
>> But actually, it didn't work well. After main SPM host went down I see
>> this
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2017-04-17 05:23:15,554Z ERROR
>> [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
>> (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM Init:
>> could not find reported vds or not up - pool: 'STG' vds_spm_id: '1'
>>
>> 2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z INFO
>>  [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
>> (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM
>> selection - vds seems as spm 'tank5'
>>
>> 2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z WARN
>>  [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
>> (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] spm vds is
>> non responsive, stopping spm selection.
>>
>>
>>
>> So that means only if BMC is up it's possible to automatically switch
>>  SPM host?
>>
>>
>>
>> BMC?
>>
>>
>>
>> If your SPM is no responsive, the system will try to fence it. Did you
>>
>> configure power management for all hosts? did you check that it
>>
>> work? How did you simulate non-responsive host?
>>
>>
>>
>> If power management is not configured or fail, the system cannot
>>
>> move the spm to another host, unless you manually confirm that the
>>
>> SPM host was rebooted.
>>
>>
>>
>> Nir
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Oh, fence agen

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Adam Litke]

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Pavel Gashev  wrote:

> Adam,
>
>
>
> You know, Sanlock has recovery mechanism that kills VDSM, or even triggers
> Watchdog to reboot SPM host in case it has lost the SPM lock.
>
> I’m asking because I had issues with my master storage that caused SPM
> host to reboot by Watchdog. And I was sure that it’s an intended behaviour.
> Isn’t it?
>

Yes of course.  But an SPM host can fail but still maintain its connection
to the storage lease.  In this case still you need classic fencing.

Something new we are investigating is the use of sanlock's request feature
which allows a new host to take the lease away from the current holder.
The current holder would be fenced by sanlock (watchdog if necessary) and
only once the lease is free would it be granted to the new requester.


>
>
>
>
> *From: *Adam Litke 
> *Date: *Monday, 17 April 2017 at 17:32
> *To: *Pavel Gashev 
> *Cc: *Nir Soffer , users 
>
> *Subject: *Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Pavel Gashev  wrote:
>
> Nir,
>
>
>
> Isn’t SPM managed via Sanlock? I believe there is no need to fence SPM
> host. Especially if there are no SPM tasks running.
>
>
>
> It's true that the exclusivity of the SPM role is enforced by Sanlock but
> you always need to fence a non-responsive SPM because there is no way to
> guarantee that the host is not still manipulating storage (eg. LV
> extensions) and we must ensure that only one host has the masterfs on the
> master storage domain mounted.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: * on behalf of Nir Soffer <
> nsof...@redhat.com>
> *Date: *Monday, 17 April 2017 at 16:06
> *To: *Konstantin Raskoshnyi , Dan Yasny <
> dya...@gmail.com>
> *Cc: *users , FERNANDO FREDIANI <
> fernando.fredi...@upx.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 8:24 AM Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
> wrote:
>
> But actually, it didn't work well. After main SPM host went down I see
> this
>
>
>
>
>
> 2017-04-17 05:23:15,554Z ERROR 
> [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
> (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM
> Init: could not find reported vds or not up - pool: 'STG' vds_spm_id: '1'
>
> 2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z INFO  
> [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
> (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM
> selection - vds seems as spm 'tank5'
>
> 2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z WARN  
> [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
> (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] spm vds
> is non responsive, stopping spm selection.
>
>
>
> So that means only if BMC is up it's possible to automatically switch  SPM
> host?
>
>
>
> BMC?
>
>
>
> If your SPM is no responsive, the system will try to fence it. Did you
>
> configure power management for all hosts? did you check that it
>
> work? How did you simulate non-responsive host?
>
>
>
> If power management is not configured or fail, the system cannot
>
> move the spm to another host, unless you manually confirm that the
>
> SPM host was rebooted.
>
>
>
> Nir
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
> wrote:
>
> Oh, fence agent works fine if I select ilo4,
>
> Thank you for your help!
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:22 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Makes sense.
>
> I was trying to set it up, but doesn't work with our staging hardware.
>
> We have old ilo100, I'll try again.
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
>
>
> It is absolutely necessary for any HA to work properly. There's of course
> the "confirm host has been shutdown" option, which serves as an override
> for the fence command, but it's manual
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:18 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Fence agent under each node?
>
>
>
> When you configure a host, there's the power management tab, where you
> need to enter the bmc details for the host. If you don't have fencing
> enabled, how do you expect the system to make sure a host running a service
> is actually down (and it is safe to start HA services elsewhere), and not,
> for example, just unreachable by the engine? How do you avoid a sp

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Pavel Gashev]

Adam,

You know, Sanlock has recovery mechanism that kills VDSM, or even triggers 
Watchdog to reboot SPM host in case it has lost the SPM lock.
I’m asking because I had issues with my master storage that caused SPM host to 
reboot by Watchdog. And I was sure that it’s an intended behaviour. Isn’t it?


From: Adam Litke 
Date: Monday, 17 April 2017 at 17:32
To: Pavel Gashev 
Cc: Nir Soffer , users 
Subject: Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt



On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Pavel Gashev 
mailto:p...@acronis.com>> wrote:
Nir,

Isn’t SPM managed via Sanlock? I believe there is no need to fence SPM host. 
Especially if there are no SPM tasks running.

It's true that the exclusivity of the SPM role is enforced by Sanlock but you 
always need to fence a non-responsive SPM because there is no way to guarantee 
that the host is not still manipulating storage (eg. LV extensions) and we must 
ensure that only one host has the masterfs on the master storage domain mounted.



From: mailto:users-boun...@ovirt.org>> on behalf of 
Nir Soffer mailto:nsof...@redhat.com>>
Date: Monday, 17 April 2017 at 16:06
To: Konstantin Raskoshnyi mailto:konra...@gmail.com>>, Dan 
Yasny mailto:dya...@gmail.com>>
Cc: users mailto:users@ovirt.org>>, FERNANDO FREDIANI 
mailto:fernando.fredi...@upx.com>>
Subject: Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 8:24 AM Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
mailto:konra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
But actually, it didn't work well. After main SPM host went down I see this


2017-04-17 05:23:15,554Z ERROR 
[org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy] (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) 
[4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM Init: could not find reported vds or 
not up - pool: 'STG' vds_spm_id: '1'
2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z INFO  
[org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy] (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) 
[4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM selection - vds seems as spm 'tank5'
2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z WARN  
[org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy] (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) 
[4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] spm vds is non responsive, stopping spm 
selection.

So that means only if BMC is up it's possible to automatically switch  SPM host?

BMC?

If your SPM is no responsive, the system will try to fence it. Did you
configure power management for all hosts? did you check that it
work? How did you simulate non-responsive host?

If power management is not configured or fail, the system cannot
move the spm to another host, unless you manually confirm that the
SPM host was rebooted.

Nir


Thanks

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
mailto:konra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Oh, fence agent works fine if I select ilo4,
Thank you for your help!

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:22 PM Dan Yasny 
mailto:dya...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
mailto:konra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Makes sense.
I was trying to set it up, but doesn't work with our staging hardware.
We have old ilo100, I'll try again.
Thanks!


It is absolutely necessary for any HA to work properly. There's of course the 
"confirm host has been shutdown" option, which serves as an override for the 
fence command, but it's manual

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:18 PM Dan Yasny 
mailto:dya...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
mailto:konra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Fence agent under each node?

When you configure a host, there's the power management tab, where you need to 
enter the bmc details for the host. If you don't have fencing enabled, how do 
you expect the system to make sure a host running a service is actually down 
(and it is safe to start HA services elsewhere), and not, for example, just 
unreachable by the engine? How do you avoid a splitbraid -> SBA ?


On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:14 PM Dan Yasny 
mailto:dya...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:13 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
mailto:konra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
"Corner cases"?
I tried to simulate crash of SPM server and ovirt kept trying to reistablished 
connection to the failed node.

Did you configure fencing?



On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:10 PM Dan Yasny 
mailto:dya...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Nir Soffer 
mailto:nsof...@redhat.com>> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 2:05 PM Dan Yasny 
mailto:dya...@redhat.com>> wrote:


On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer" 
mailto:nsof...@redhat.com>> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny 
mailto:dya...@gmail.com>> wrote:
When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to perform the 
initial storage operations, but once the SD is defined, it's details are in the 
engine database, and all the hosts get connected to it directly. 

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Adam Litke]

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Pavel Gashev  wrote:

> Nir,
>
>
>
> Isn’t SPM managed via Sanlock? I believe there is no need to fence SPM
> host. Especially if there are no SPM tasks running.
>

It's true that the exclusivity of the SPM role is enforced by Sanlock but
you always need to fence a non-responsive SPM because there is no way to
guarantee that the host is not still manipulating storage (eg. LV
extensions) and we must ensure that only one host has the masterfs on the
master storage domain mounted.


>
>
>
>
> *From: * on behalf of Nir Soffer <
> nsof...@redhat.com>
> *Date: *Monday, 17 April 2017 at 16:06
> *To: *Konstantin Raskoshnyi , Dan Yasny <
> dya...@gmail.com>
> *Cc: *users , FERNANDO FREDIANI <
> fernando.fredi...@upx.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 8:24 AM Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
> wrote:
>
> But actually, it didn't work well. After main SPM host went down I see
> this
>
>
>
>
> 2017-04-17 05:23:15,554Z ERROR 
> [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
> (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM
> Init: could not find reported vds or not up - pool: 'STG' vds_spm_id: '1'
>
> 2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z INFO  
> [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
> (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM
> selection - vds seems as spm 'tank5'
>
> 2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z WARN  
> [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
> (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] spm vds
> is non responsive, stopping spm selection.
>
>
>
> So that means only if BMC is up it's possible to automatically switch  SPM
> host?
>
>
>
> BMC?
>
>
>
> If your SPM is no responsive, the system will try to fence it. Did you
>
> configure power management for all hosts? did you check that it
>
> work? How did you simulate non-responsive host?
>
>
>
> If power management is not configured or fail, the system cannot
>
> move the spm to another host, unless you manually confirm that the
>
> SPM host was rebooted.
>
>
>
> Nir
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
> wrote:
>
> Oh, fence agent works fine if I select ilo4,
>
> Thank you for your help!
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:22 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Makes sense.
>
> I was trying to set it up, but doesn't work with our staging hardware.
>
> We have old ilo100, I'll try again.
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
>
>
> It is absolutely necessary for any HA to work properly. There's of course
> the "confirm host has been shutdown" option, which serves as an override
> for the fence command, but it's manual
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:18 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Fence agent under each node?
>
>
>
> When you configure a host, there's the power management tab, where you
> need to enter the bmc details for the host. If you don't have fencing
> enabled, how do you expect the system to make sure a host running a service
> is actually down (and it is safe to start HA services elsewhere), and not,
> for example, just unreachable by the engine? How do you avoid a splitbraid
> -> SBA ?
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:14 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:13 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> "Corner cases"?
>
> I tried to simulate crash of SPM server and ovirt kept trying to
> reistablished connection to the failed node.
>
>
>
> Did you configure fencing?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:10 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Nir Soffer  wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 2:05 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer"  wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
> When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to perform
> the initial storage operations, but once the SD is defined, it's details
> are in the engine database, and all the hosts get connected to it directly.
> If the first host you used to define the SD goes down, all other hosts will
> still remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service,

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Adam Litke]

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 9:12 AM, FERNANDO FREDIANI <
fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:

> Should I understand then that fecing is not mandatory, just advised and
> there are no downtimes to the rest of the cluster if a pending manual
> action has to be done to confirm a host has been rebooted in order to move
> the SPM to another live host. Perhaps only effect is not be able to add new
> hosts and connect to storage or something ?
>
A missing SPM will not affect existing VMs.  Running VMs (on hosts other
than the SPM host) will continue to run normally and you can even start
existing VMs.  Without an SPM you will not be able to manipulate the
storage (Add/remove domains, add/remove disks, migrate disks, etc).



> Fernando
> On 17/04/2017 10:06, Nir Soffer wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 8:24 AM Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
> wrote:
>
>> But actually, it didn't work well. After main SPM host went down I see
>> this
>> [image: Screen Shot 2017-04-16 at 10.22.00 PM.png]
>>
>> 2017-04-17 05:23:15,554Z ERROR 
>> [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
>> (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM
>> Init: could not find reported vds or not up - pool: 'STG' vds_spm_id: '1'
>> 2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z INFO  
>> [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
>> (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM
>> selection - vds seems as spm 'tank5'
>> 2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z WARN  
>> [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
>> (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] spm vds
>> is non responsive, stopping spm selection.
>>
>> So that means only if BMC is up it's possible to automatically switch
>>  SPM host?
>>
>
> BMC?
>
> If your SPM is no responsive, the system will try to fence it. Did you
> configure power management for all hosts? did you check that it
> work? How did you simulate non-responsive host?
>
> If power management is not configured or fail, the system cannot
> move the spm to another host, unless you manually confirm that the
> SPM host was rebooted.
>
> Nir
>
>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Oh, fence agent works fine if I select ilo4,
>>> Thank you for your help!
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:22 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>>
 On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
 konra...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Makes sense.
> I was trying to set it up, but doesn't work with our staging hardware.
> We have old ilo100, I'll try again.
> Thanks!
>
>
 It is absolutely necessary for any HA to work properly. There's of
 course the "confirm host has been shutdown" option, which serves as an
 override for the fence command, but it's manual


> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:18 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Fence agent under each node?
>>>
>>
>> When you configure a host, there's the power management tab, where
>> you need to enter the bmc details for the host. If you don't have fencing
>> enabled, how do you expect the system to make sure a host running a 
>> service
>> is actually down (and it is safe to start HA services elsewhere), and 
>> not,
>> for example, just unreachable by the engine? How do you avoid a 
>> splitbraid
>> -> SBA ?
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:14 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>>
 On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:13 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
 konra...@gmail.com> wrote:

> "Corner cases"?
> I tried to simulate crash of SPM server and ovirt kept trying to
> reistablished connection to the failed node.
>

 Did you configure fencing?


>
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:10 PM Dan Yasny 
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Nir Soffer 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 2:05 PM Dan Yasny 
>>> wrote:
>>>


 On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer" 
 wrote:

 On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny 
 wrote:

> When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host
> to perform the initial storage operations, but once the SD is 
> defined, it's
> details are in the engine database, and all the hosts get 
> connected to it
> directly. If the first host you used to define the SD goes down, 
> all other
> hosts will still remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service, 
> and if
> the current SPM host goes down, SPM gets started on another host 
> in the DC.

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Konstantin Raskoshnyi]

Hi Nir,
BMC - board management controller, in my case I have ilo.
Yes I set up power management for all hosts - ovirt sees ilo status as ok.
I use remote pdu to shutdown the port, after that happens the picture I
attached.
After I switch power port on, ovirt is able to read ilo status, sees that
Linux is down and immediately switches the spm server.

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 6:07 AM Nir Soffer  wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 8:24 AM Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
> wrote:
>
>> But actually, it didn't work well. After main SPM host went down I see
>> this
>>
> [image: Screen Shot 2017-04-16 at 10.22.00 PM.png]
>>
>
>> 2017-04-17 05:23:15,554Z ERROR
>> [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
>> (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM Init:
>> could not find reported vds or not up - pool: 'STG' vds_spm_id: '1'
>> 2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z INFO
>>  [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
>> (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM
>> selection - vds seems as spm 'tank5'
>> 2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z WARN
>>  [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
>> (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] spm vds is
>> non responsive, stopping spm selection.
>>
>> So that means only if BMC is up it's possible to automatically switch
>>  SPM host?
>>
>
> BMC?
>
> If your SPM is no responsive, the system will try to fence it. Did you
> configure power management for all hosts? did you check that it
> work? How did you simulate non-responsive host?
>
> If power management is not configured or fail, the system cannot
> move the spm to another host, unless you manually confirm that the
> SPM host was rebooted.
>
> Nir
>
>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Oh, fence agent works fine if I select ilo4,
>>> Thank you for your help!
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:22 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>>
 On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
 konra...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Makes sense.
> I was trying to set it up, but doesn't work with our staging hardware.
> We have old ilo100, I'll try again.
> Thanks!
>
>
 It is absolutely necessary for any HA to work properly. There's of
 course the "confirm host has been shutdown" option, which serves as an
 override for the fence command, but it's manual


> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:18 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Fence agent under each node?
>>>
>>
>> When you configure a host, there's the power management tab, where
>> you need to enter the bmc details for the host. If you don't have fencing
>> enabled, how do you expect the system to make sure a host running a 
>> service
>> is actually down (and it is safe to start HA services elsewhere), and 
>> not,
>> for example, just unreachable by the engine? How do you avoid a 
>> splitbraid
>> -> SBA ?
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:14 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>>
 On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:13 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
 konra...@gmail.com> wrote:

> "Corner cases"?
> I tried to simulate crash of SPM server and ovirt kept trying to
> reistablished connection to the failed node.
>

 Did you configure fencing?


>
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:10 PM Dan Yasny 
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Nir Soffer 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 2:05 PM Dan Yasny 
>>> wrote:
>>>


 On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer" 
 wrote:

 On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny 
 wrote:

> When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host
> to perform the initial storage operations, but once the SD is 
> defined, it's
> details are in the engine database, and all the hosts get 
> connected to it
> directly. If the first host you used to define the SD goes down, 
> all other
> hosts will still remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service, 
> and if
> the current SPM host goes down, SPM gets started on another host 
> in the DC.
> In short, unless your actual NFS exporting host goes down, there 
> is no
> outage.
>

 There is no storage outage, but if you shutdown the spm host,
 the spm host
 will not move to a new host until the spm host is online again,
 or you confirm
 manually that 

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Pavel Gashev]

Nir,

Isn’t SPM managed via Sanlock? I believe there is no need to fence SPM host. 
Especially if there are no SPM tasks running.


From:  on behalf of Nir Soffer 
Date: Monday, 17 April 2017 at 16:06
To: Konstantin Raskoshnyi , Dan Yasny 
Cc: users , FERNANDO FREDIANI 
Subject: Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 8:24 AM Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
mailto:konra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
But actually, it didn't work well. After main SPM host went down I see this


2017-04-17 05:23:15,554Z ERROR 
[org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy] (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) 
[4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM Init: could not find reported vds or 
not up - pool: 'STG' vds_spm_id: '1'
2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z INFO  
[org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy] (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) 
[4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM selection - vds seems as spm 'tank5'
2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z WARN  
[org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy] (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) 
[4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] spm vds is non responsive, stopping spm 
selection.

So that means only if BMC is up it's possible to automatically switch  SPM host?

BMC?

If your SPM is no responsive, the system will try to fence it. Did you
configure power management for all hosts? did you check that it
work? How did you simulate non-responsive host?

If power management is not configured or fail, the system cannot
move the spm to another host, unless you manually confirm that the
SPM host was rebooted.

Nir


Thanks

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
mailto:konra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Oh, fence agent works fine if I select ilo4,
Thank you for your help!

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:22 PM Dan Yasny 
mailto:dya...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
mailto:konra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Makes sense.
I was trying to set it up, but doesn't work with our staging hardware.
We have old ilo100, I'll try again.
Thanks!


It is absolutely necessary for any HA to work properly. There's of course the 
"confirm host has been shutdown" option, which serves as an override for the 
fence command, but it's manual

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:18 PM Dan Yasny 
mailto:dya...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
mailto:konra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Fence agent under each node?

When you configure a host, there's the power management tab, where you need to 
enter the bmc details for the host. If you don't have fencing enabled, how do 
you expect the system to make sure a host running a service is actually down 
(and it is safe to start HA services elsewhere), and not, for example, just 
unreachable by the engine? How do you avoid a splitbraid -> SBA ?


On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:14 PM Dan Yasny 
mailto:dya...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:13 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
mailto:konra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
"Corner cases"?
I tried to simulate crash of SPM server and ovirt kept trying to reistablished 
connection to the failed node.

Did you configure fencing?



On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:10 PM Dan Yasny 
mailto:dya...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Nir Soffer 
mailto:nsof...@redhat.com>> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 2:05 PM Dan Yasny 
mailto:dya...@redhat.com>> wrote:


On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer" 
mailto:nsof...@redhat.com>> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny 
mailto:dya...@gmail.com>> wrote:
When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to perform the 
initial storage operations, but once the SD is defined, it's details are in the 
engine database, and all the hosts get connected to it directly. If the first 
host you used to define the SD goes down, all other hosts will still remain 
connected and work. SPM is an HA service, and if the current SPM host goes 
down, SPM gets started on another host in the DC. In short, unless your actual 
NFS exporting host goes down, there is no outage.

There is no storage outage, but if you shutdown the spm host, the spm host
will not move to a new host until the spm host is online again, or you confirm
manually that the spm host was rebooted.

In a properly configured setup the SBA should take care of that. That's the 
whole point of HA services

In some cases like power loss or hardware failure, there is no way to start
the spm host, and the system cannot recover automatically.

There are always corner cases, no doubt. But in a normal situation. where an 
SPM host goes down because of a hardware failure, it gets fenced, other hosts 
contend for SPM and start it. No surprises there.


Nir



Nir


On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
mailto:konra...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Fernando,
I see e

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[FERNANDO FREDIANI]

Should I understand then that fecing is not mandatory, just advised and 
there are no downtimes to the rest of the cluster if a pending manual 
action has to be done to confirm a host has been rebooted in order to 
move the SPM to another live host. Perhaps only effect is not be able to 
add new hosts and connect to storage or something ?


Fernando

On 17/04/2017 10:06, Nir Soffer wrote:
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 8:24 AM Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
mailto:konra...@gmail.com>> wrote:


But actually, it didn't work well. After main SPM host went down I
see this
Screen Shot 2017-04-16 at 10.22.00 PM.png

2017-04-17 05:23:15,554Z ERROR
[org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
(DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1]
SPM Init: could not find reported vds or not up - pool: 'STG'
vds_spm_id: '1'
2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z INFO
 [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
(DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1]
SPM selection - vds seems as spm 'tank5'
2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z WARN
 [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
(DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1]
spm vds is non responsive, stopping spm selection.

So that means only if BMC is up it's possible to automatically
switch  SPM host?


BMC?

If your SPM is no responsive, the system will try to fence it. Did you
configure power management for all hosts? did you check that it
work? How did you simulate non-responsive host?

If power management is not configured or fail, the system cannot
move the spm to another host, unless you manually confirm that the
SPM host was rebooted.

Nir


Thanks

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi
mailto:konra...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Oh, fence agent works fine if I select ilo4,
Thank you for your help!

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:22 PM Dan Yasny mailto:dya...@gmail.com>> wrote:

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi
mailto:konra...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Makes sense.
I was trying to set it up, but doesn't work with our
staging hardware.
We have old ilo100, I'll try again.
Thanks!


It is absolutely necessary for any HA to work properly.
There's of course the "confirm host has been shutdown"
option, which serves as an override for the fence command,
but it's manual

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:18 PM Dan Yasny
mailto:dya...@gmail.com>> wrote:

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Konstantin
Raskoshnyi mailto:konra...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Fence agent under each node?


When you configure a host, there's the power
management tab, where you need to enter the bmc
details for the host. If you don't have fencing
enabled, how do you expect the system to make sure
a host running a service is actually down (and it
is safe to start HA services elsewhere), and not,
for example, just unreachable by the engine? How
do you avoid a splitbraid -> SBA ?


On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:14 PM Dan Yasny
mailto:dya...@gmail.com>>
wrote:

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:13 PM,
Konstantin Raskoshnyi mailto:konra...@gmail.com>> wrote:

"Corner cases"?
I tried to simulate crash of SPM
server and ovirt kept trying to
reistablished connection to the failed
node.


Did you configure fencing?



On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:10 PM Dan
Yasny mailto:dya...@gmail.com>> wrote:

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 7:29 AM,
Nir Soffer mailto:nsof...@redhat.com>> wrote:

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 2:05
PM Dan Yasny
mailto:dya...@redhat.com>> wrote:



On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM,
"Nir Soffer"
mailto:nsof...@redhat.com>>
wrote:

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017
at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny
mailto:dya...@gmail.com>>

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Nir Soffer]

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 8:24 AM Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
wrote:

> But actually, it didn't work well. After main SPM host went down I see this
> [image: Screen Shot 2017-04-16 at 10.22.00 PM.png]
>
> 2017-04-17 05:23:15,554Z ERROR
> [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
> (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM Init:
> could not find reported vds or not up - pool: 'STG' vds_spm_id: '1'
> 2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z INFO
>  [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
> (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM
> selection - vds seems as spm 'tank5'
> 2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z WARN
>  [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
> (DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] spm vds is
> non responsive, stopping spm selection.
>
> So that means only if BMC is up it's possible to automatically switch  SPM
> host?
>

BMC?

If your SPM is no responsive, the system will try to fence it. Did you
configure power management for all hosts? did you check that it
work? How did you simulate non-responsive host?

If power management is not configured or fail, the system cannot
move the spm to another host, unless you manually confirm that the
SPM host was rebooted.

Nir


>
> Thanks
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi  > wrote:
>
>> Oh, fence agent works fine if I select ilo4,
>> Thank you for your help!
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:22 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Makes sense.
 I was trying to set it up, but doesn't work with our staging hardware.
 We have old ilo100, I'll try again.
 Thanks!


>>> It is absolutely necessary for any HA to work properly. There's of
>>> course the "confirm host has been shutdown" option, which serves as an
>>> override for the fence command, but it's manual
>>>
>>>
 On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:18 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Fence agent under each node?
>>
>
> When you configure a host, there's the power management tab, where you
> need to enter the bmc details for the host. If you don't have fencing
> enabled, how do you expect the system to make sure a host running a 
> service
> is actually down (and it is safe to start HA services elsewhere), and not,
> for example, just unreachable by the engine? How do you avoid a splitbraid
> -> SBA ?
>
>
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:14 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:13 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 "Corner cases"?
 I tried to simulate crash of SPM server and ovirt kept trying to
 reistablished connection to the failed node.

>>>
>>> Did you configure fencing?
>>>
>>>


 On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:10 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Nir Soffer 
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 2:05 PM Dan Yasny 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer" 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to
 perform the initial storage operations, but once the SD is 
 defined, it's
 details are in the engine database, and all the hosts get 
 connected to it
 directly. If the first host you used to define the SD goes down, 
 all other
 hosts will still remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service, 
 and if
 the current SPM host goes down, SPM gets started on another host 
 in the DC.
 In short, unless your actual NFS exporting host goes down, there 
 is no
 outage.

>>>
>>> There is no storage outage, but if you shutdown the spm host,
>>> the spm host
>>> will not move to a new host until the spm host is online again,
>>> or you confirm
>>> manually that the spm host was rebooted.
>>>
>>>
>>> In a properly configured setup the SBA should take care of that.
>>> That's the whole point of HA services
>>>
>>
>> In some cases like power loss or hardware failure, there is no
>> way to start
>> the spm host, and the system cannot recover automatically.
>>
>
> There are always corner cases, no doubt. But in a normal
> situation. where an SPM host goes down because of a hardware failure, 
> it
> gets fenced, other hosts contend for SP

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[FERNANDO FREDIANI]

If this works in this way then it's a huge downside in the architecture. 
Perhaps someone can clarify in more details.


Fernando


On 15/04/2017 14:53, Konstantin Raskoshnyi wrote:

Hi Fernando,
I see each host has direct connection nfs mount, but yes, if main host 
to which I connected nfs storage going down the storage becomes 
unavailable and all vms are down



On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI 
mailto:fernando.fredi...@upx.com>> wrote:


Hello Konstantin.

That doesn`t make much sense make a whole cluster depend on a
single host. From what I know any host talk directly to NFS
Storage Array or whatever other Shared Storage you have.
Have you tested that host going down if that affects the other
with the NFS mounted directlly in a NFS Storage array ?

Fernando

2017-04-15 12:42 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi
mailto:konra...@gmail.com>>:

In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
If host goes down storage is not available.

On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI
mailto:fernando.fredi...@upx.com>>
wrote:

Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage
server for running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other
type of storage, specially FC and iSCSI and performance is
pretty much the same, so you won`t get better results
other than management going to other type.

Fernando

2017-04-15 5:25 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi
mailto:konra...@gmail.com>>:

Hi guys,
I have one nfs storage,
it's connected through host1.
host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate
vms between them.

The question is - if host1 is down - all
infrastructure is down, since all traffic goes through
host1,
is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?

Only glusterfs?

Thanks


___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org 
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users




___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Konstantin Raskoshnyi]

But actually, it didn't work well. After main SPM host went down I see this

2017-04-17 05:23:15,554Z ERROR
[org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
(DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM Init:
could not find reported vds or not up - pool: 'STG' vds_spm_id: '1'
2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z INFO
 [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
(DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] SPM
selection - vds seems as spm 'tank5'
2017-04-17 05:23:15,567Z WARN
 [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IrsProxy]
(DefaultQuartzScheduler5) [4dcc033d-26bf-49bb-bfaa-03a970dbbec1] spm vds is
non responsive, stopping spm selection.

So that means only if BMC is up it's possible to automatically switch  SPM
host?

Thanks

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:29 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
wrote:

> Oh, fence agent works fine if I select ilo4,
> Thank you for your help!
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:22 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Makes sense.
>>> I was trying to set it up, but doesn't work with our staging hardware.
>>> We have old ilo100, I'll try again.
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>>
>> It is absolutely necessary for any HA to work properly. There's of course
>> the "confirm host has been shutdown" option, which serves as an override
>> for the fence command, but it's manual
>>
>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:18 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>>
 On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
 konra...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Fence agent under each node?
>

 When you configure a host, there's the power management tab, where you
 need to enter the bmc details for the host. If you don't have fencing
 enabled, how do you expect the system to make sure a host running a service
 is actually down (and it is safe to start HA services elsewhere), and not,
 for example, just unreachable by the engine? How do you avoid a splitbraid
 -> SBA ?


>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:14 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:13 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "Corner cases"?
>>> I tried to simulate crash of SPM server and ovirt kept trying to
>>> reistablished connection to the failed node.
>>>
>>
>> Did you configure fencing?
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:10 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>>
 On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Nir Soffer 
 wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 2:05 PM Dan Yasny 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer"  wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to
>>> perform the initial storage operations, but once the SD is defined, 
>>> it's
>>> details are in the engine database, and all the hosts get connected 
>>> to it
>>> directly. If the first host you used to define the SD goes down, 
>>> all other
>>> hosts will still remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service, 
>>> and if
>>> the current SPM host goes down, SPM gets started on another host in 
>>> the DC.
>>> In short, unless your actual NFS exporting host goes down, there is 
>>> no
>>> outage.
>>>
>>
>> There is no storage outage, but if you shutdown the spm host, the
>> spm host
>> will not move to a new host until the spm host is online again,
>> or you confirm
>> manually that the spm host was rebooted.
>>
>>
>> In a properly configured setup the SBA should take care of that.
>> That's the whole point of HA services
>>
>
> In some cases like power loss or hardware failure, there is no way
> to start
> the spm host, and the system cannot recover automatically.
>

 There are always corner cases, no doubt. But in a normal situation.
 where an SPM host goes down because of a hardware failure, it gets 
 fenced,
 other hosts contend for SPM and start it. No surprises there.


>
> Nir
>
>
>>
>>
>> Nir
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Fernando,
 I see each host has direct connection nfs mount, but yes, if
 main host to which I connected nfs storage going down the storage 
 becomes
 unavailable and all vms are down


 On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Konstantin Raskoshnyi]

Oh, fence agent works fine if I select ilo4,
Thank you for your help!

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:22 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Makes sense.
>> I was trying to set it up, but doesn't work with our staging hardware.
>> We have old ilo100, I'll try again.
>> Thanks!
>>
>>
> It is absolutely necessary for any HA to work properly. There's of course
> the "confirm host has been shutdown" option, which serves as an override
> for the fence command, but it's manual
>
>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:18 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Fence agent under each node?

>>>
>>> When you configure a host, there's the power management tab, where you
>>> need to enter the bmc details for the host. If you don't have fencing
>>> enabled, how do you expect the system to make sure a host running a service
>>> is actually down (and it is safe to start HA services elsewhere), and not,
>>> for example, just unreachable by the engine? How do you avoid a splitbraid
>>> -> SBA ?
>>>
>>>

 On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:14 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:13 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Corner cases"?
>> I tried to simulate crash of SPM server and ovirt kept trying to
>> reistablished connection to the failed node.
>>
>
> Did you configure fencing?
>
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:10 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Nir Soffer 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 2:05 PM Dan Yasny 
 wrote:

>
>
> On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer"  wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny 
> wrote:
>
>> When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to
>> perform the initial storage operations, but once the SD is defined, 
>> it's
>> details are in the engine database, and all the hosts get connected 
>> to it
>> directly. If the first host you used to define the SD goes down, all 
>> other
>> hosts will still remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service, 
>> and if
>> the current SPM host goes down, SPM gets started on another host in 
>> the DC.
>> In short, unless your actual NFS exporting host goes down, there is 
>> no
>> outage.
>>
>
> There is no storage outage, but if you shutdown the spm host, the
> spm host
> will not move to a new host until the spm host is online again, or
> you confirm
> manually that the spm host was rebooted.
>
>
> In a properly configured setup the SBA should take care of that.
> That's the whole point of HA services
>

 In some cases like power loss or hardware failure, there is no way
 to start
 the spm host, and the system cannot recover automatically.

>>>
>>> There are always corner cases, no doubt. But in a normal situation.
>>> where an SPM host goes down because of a hardware failure, it gets 
>>> fenced,
>>> other hosts contend for SPM and start it. No surprises there.
>>>
>>>

 Nir


>
>
> Nir
>
>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Fernando,
>>> I see each host has direct connection nfs mount, but yes, if
>>> main host to which I connected nfs storage going down the storage 
>>> becomes
>>> unavailable and all vms are down
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>>> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hello Konstantin.

 That doesn`t make much sense make a whole cluster depend on a
 single host. From what I know any host talk directly to NFS 
 Storage Array
 or whatever other Shared Storage you have.
 Have you tested that host going down if that affects the other
 with the NFS mounted directlly in a NFS Storage array ?

 Fernando

 2017-04-15 12:42 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
 konra...@gmail.com>:

> In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
> If host goes down storage is not available.
>
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>
>> Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storag

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Dan Yasny]

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
wrote:

> Makes sense.
> I was trying to set it up, but doesn't work with our staging hardware.
> We have old ilo100, I'll try again.
> Thanks!
>
>
It is absolutely necessary for any HA to work properly. There's of course
the "confirm host has been shutdown" option, which serves as an override
for the fence command, but it's manual


> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:18 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Fence agent under each node?
>>>
>>
>> When you configure a host, there's the power management tab, where you
>> need to enter the bmc details for the host. If you don't have fencing
>> enabled, how do you expect the system to make sure a host running a service
>> is actually down (and it is safe to start HA services elsewhere), and not,
>> for example, just unreachable by the engine? How do you avoid a splitbraid
>> -> SBA ?
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:14 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>>
 On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:13 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
 konra...@gmail.com> wrote:

> "Corner cases"?
> I tried to simulate crash of SPM server and ovirt kept trying to
> reistablished connection to the failed node.
>

 Did you configure fencing?


>
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:10 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Nir Soffer 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 2:05 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>>


 On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer"  wrote:

 On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny  wrote:

> When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to
> perform the initial storage operations, but once the SD is defined, 
> it's
> details are in the engine database, and all the hosts get connected 
> to it
> directly. If the first host you used to define the SD goes down, all 
> other
> hosts will still remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service, and 
> if
> the current SPM host goes down, SPM gets started on another host in 
> the DC.
> In short, unless your actual NFS exporting host goes down, there is no
> outage.
>

 There is no storage outage, but if you shutdown the spm host, the
 spm host
 will not move to a new host until the spm host is online again, or
 you confirm
 manually that the spm host was rebooted.


 In a properly configured setup the SBA should take care of that.
 That's the whole point of HA services

>>>
>>> In some cases like power loss or hardware failure, there is no way
>>> to start
>>> the spm host, and the system cannot recover automatically.
>>>
>>
>> There are always corner cases, no doubt. But in a normal situation.
>> where an SPM host goes down because of a hardware failure, it gets 
>> fenced,
>> other hosts contend for SPM and start it. No surprises there.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Nir
>>>
>>>


 Nir


>
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Fernando,
>> I see each host has direct connection nfs mount, but yes, if main
>> host to which I connected nfs storage going down the storage becomes
>> unavailable and all vms are down
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Konstantin.
>>>
>>> That doesn`t make much sense make a whole cluster depend on a
>>> single host. From what I know any host talk directly to NFS Storage 
>>> Array
>>> or whatever other Shared Storage you have.
>>> Have you tested that host going down if that affects the other
>>> with the NFS mounted directlly in a NFS Storage array ?
>>>
>>> Fernando
>>>
>>> 2017-04-15 12:42 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>>> konra...@gmail.com>:
>>>
 In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
 If host goes down storage is not available.

 On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
 fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:

> Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage
> server for running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
> In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other type of
> storage, specially FC and iSCSI and performance is pretty much 
> the same, so
> you won`t get better results other than management going to o

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Konstantin Raskoshnyi]

Makes sense.
I was trying to set it up, but doesn't work with our staging hardware.
We have old ilo100, I'll try again.
Thanks!
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:18 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Fence agent under each node?
>>
>
> When you configure a host, there's the power management tab, where you
> need to enter the bmc details for the host. If you don't have fencing
> enabled, how do you expect the system to make sure a host running a service
> is actually down (and it is safe to start HA services elsewhere), and not,
> for example, just unreachable by the engine? How do you avoid a splitbraid
> -> SBA ?
>
>
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:14 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:13 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 "Corner cases"?
 I tried to simulate crash of SPM server and ovirt kept trying to
 reistablished connection to the failed node.

>>>
>>> Did you configure fencing?
>>>
>>>


 On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:10 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Nir Soffer 
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 2:05 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer"  wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>>
 When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to
 perform the initial storage operations, but once the SD is defined, 
 it's
 details are in the engine database, and all the hosts get connected to 
 it
 directly. If the first host you used to define the SD goes down, all 
 other
 hosts will still remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service, and 
 if
 the current SPM host goes down, SPM gets started on another host in 
 the DC.
 In short, unless your actual NFS exporting host goes down, there is no
 outage.

>>>
>>> There is no storage outage, but if you shutdown the spm host, the
>>> spm host
>>> will not move to a new host until the spm host is online again, or
>>> you confirm
>>> manually that the spm host was rebooted.
>>>
>>>
>>> In a properly configured setup the SBA should take care of that.
>>> That's the whole point of HA services
>>>
>>
>> In some cases like power loss or hardware failure, there is no way to
>> start
>> the spm host, and the system cannot recover automatically.
>>
>
> There are always corner cases, no doubt. But in a normal situation.
> where an SPM host goes down because of a hardware failure, it gets fenced,
> other hosts contend for SPM and start it. No surprises there.
>
>
>>
>> Nir
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Nir
>>>
>>>

 On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
 konra...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Fernando,
> I see each host has direct connection nfs mount, but yes, if main
> host to which I connected nfs storage going down the storage becomes
> unavailable and all vms are down
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello Konstantin.
>>
>> That doesn`t make much sense make a whole cluster depend on a
>> single host. From what I know any host talk directly to NFS Storage 
>> Array
>> or whatever other Shared Storage you have.
>> Have you tested that host going down if that affects the other
>> with the NFS mounted directlly in a NFS Storage array ?
>>
>> Fernando
>>
>> 2017-04-15 12:42 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>> konra...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
>>> If host goes down storage is not available.
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>>> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>>>
 Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage
 server for running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
 In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other type of
 storage, specially FC and iSCSI and performance is pretty much the 
 same, so
 you won`t get better results other than management going to other 
 type.

 Fernando

 2017-04-15 5:25 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
 konra...@gmail.com>:

> Hi guys,
> I have one nfs storage,
> it's connected through host1.
> host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between
> them.
>
>

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Dan Yasny]

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
wrote:

> Fence agent under each node?
>

When you configure a host, there's the power management tab, where you need
to enter the bmc details for the host. If you don't have fencing enabled,
how do you expect the system to make sure a host running a service is
actually down (and it is safe to start HA services elsewhere), and not, for
example, just unreachable by the engine? How do you avoid a splitbraid ->
SBA ?


>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:14 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:13 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "Corner cases"?
>>> I tried to simulate crash of SPM server and ovirt kept trying to
>>> reistablished connection to the failed node.
>>>
>>
>> Did you configure fencing?
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:10 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>>
 On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Nir Soffer  wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 2:05 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer"  wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>
>>> When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to
>>> perform the initial storage operations, but once the SD is defined, it's
>>> details are in the engine database, and all the hosts get connected to 
>>> it
>>> directly. If the first host you used to define the SD goes down, all 
>>> other
>>> hosts will still remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service, and if
>>> the current SPM host goes down, SPM gets started on another host in the 
>>> DC.
>>> In short, unless your actual NFS exporting host goes down, there is no
>>> outage.
>>>
>>
>> There is no storage outage, but if you shutdown the spm host, the spm
>> host
>> will not move to a new host until the spm host is online again, or
>> you confirm
>> manually that the spm host was rebooted.
>>
>>
>> In a properly configured setup the SBA should take care of that.
>> That's the whole point of HA services
>>
>
> In some cases like power loss or hardware failure, there is no way to
> start
> the spm host, and the system cannot recover automatically.
>

 There are always corner cases, no doubt. But in a normal situation.
 where an SPM host goes down because of a hardware failure, it gets fenced,
 other hosts contend for SPM and start it. No surprises there.


>
> Nir
>
>
>>
>>
>> Nir
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Fernando,
 I see each host has direct connection nfs mount, but yes, if main
 host to which I connected nfs storage going down the storage becomes
 unavailable and all vms are down


 On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
 fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:

> Hello Konstantin.
>
> That doesn`t make much sense make a whole cluster depend on a
> single host. From what I know any host talk directly to NFS Storage 
> Array
> or whatever other Shared Storage you have.
> Have you tested that host going down if that affects the other
> with the NFS mounted directlly in a NFS Storage array ?
>
> Fernando
>
> 2017-04-15 12:42 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
> konra...@gmail.com>:
>
>> In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
>> If host goes down storage is not available.
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage server
>>> for running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
>>> In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other type of
>>> storage, specially FC and iSCSI and performance is pretty much the 
>>> same, so
>>> you won`t get better results other than management going to other 
>>> type.
>>>
>>> Fernando
>>>
>>> 2017-04-15 5:25 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>>> konra...@gmail.com>:
>>>
 Hi guys,
 I have one nfs storage,
 it's connected through host1.
 host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between
 them.

 The question is - if host1 is down - all infrastructure is
 down, since all traffic goes through host1,
 is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?

 Only glusterfs?

 Thanks


 ___
 Users m

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Konstantin Raskoshnyi]

Fence agent under each node?

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:14 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:13 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "Corner cases"?
>> I tried to simulate crash of SPM server and ovirt kept trying to
>> reistablished connection to the failed node.
>>
>
> Did you configure fencing?
>
>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:10 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Nir Soffer  wrote:
>>>
 On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 2:05 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:

>
>
> On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer"  wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
>> When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to
>> perform the initial storage operations, but once the SD is defined, it's
>> details are in the engine database, and all the hosts get connected to it
>> directly. If the first host you used to define the SD goes down, all 
>> other
>> hosts will still remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service, and if
>> the current SPM host goes down, SPM gets started on another host in the 
>> DC.
>> In short, unless your actual NFS exporting host goes down, there is no
>> outage.
>>
>
> There is no storage outage, but if you shutdown the spm host, the spm
> host
> will not move to a new host until the spm host is online again, or you
> confirm
> manually that the spm host was rebooted.
>
>
> In a properly configured setup the SBA should take care of that.
> That's the whole point of HA services
>

 In some cases like power loss or hardware failure, there is no way to
 start
 the spm host, and the system cannot recover automatically.

>>>
>>> There are always corner cases, no doubt. But in a normal situation.
>>> where an SPM host goes down because of a hardware failure, it gets fenced,
>>> other hosts contend for SPM and start it. No surprises there.
>>>
>>>

 Nir


>
>
> Nir
>
>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Fernando,
>>> I see each host has direct connection nfs mount, but yes, if main
>>> host to which I connected nfs storage going down the storage becomes
>>> unavailable and all vms are down
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>>> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hello Konstantin.

 That doesn`t make much sense make a whole cluster depend on a
 single host. From what I know any host talk directly to NFS Storage 
 Array
 or whatever other Shared Storage you have.
 Have you tested that host going down if that affects the other with
 the NFS mounted directlly in a NFS Storage array ?

 Fernando

 2017-04-15 12:42 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
 konra...@gmail.com>:

> In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
> If host goes down storage is not available.
>
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>
>> Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage server
>> for running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
>> In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other type of
>> storage, specially FC and iSCSI and performance is pretty much the 
>> same, so
>> you won`t get better results other than management going to other 
>> type.
>>
>> Fernando
>>
>> 2017-04-15 5:25 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>> konra...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>> I have one nfs storage,
>>> it's connected through host1.
>>> host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between
>>> them.
>>>
>>> The question is - if host1 is down - all infrastructure is down,
>>> since all traffic goes through host1,
>>> is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?
>>>
>>> Only glusterfs?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Users mailing list
>>> Users@ovirt.org
>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>>

>>> ___
>>> Users mailing list
>>> Users@ovirt.org
>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list
>> Users@ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>
> ___
> Users mailing list
> Users@ovirt.org
> http:/

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Dan Yasny]

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:13 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
wrote:

> "Corner cases"?
> I tried to simulate crash of SPM server and ovirt kept trying to
> reistablished connection to the failed node.
>

Did you configure fencing?


>
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:10 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Nir Soffer  wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 2:05 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>>


 On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer"  wrote:

 On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny  wrote:

> When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to
> perform the initial storage operations, but once the SD is defined, it's
> details are in the engine database, and all the hosts get connected to it
> directly. If the first host you used to define the SD goes down, all other
> hosts will still remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service, and if
> the current SPM host goes down, SPM gets started on another host in the 
> DC.
> In short, unless your actual NFS exporting host goes down, there is no
> outage.
>

 There is no storage outage, but if you shutdown the spm host, the spm
 host
 will not move to a new host until the spm host is online again, or you
 confirm
 manually that the spm host was rebooted.


 In a properly configured setup the SBA should take care of that. That's
 the whole point of HA services

>>>
>>> In some cases like power loss or hardware failure, there is no way to
>>> start
>>> the spm host, and the system cannot recover automatically.
>>>
>>
>> There are always corner cases, no doubt. But in a normal situation. where
>> an SPM host goes down because of a hardware failure, it gets fenced, other
>> hosts contend for SPM and start it. No surprises there.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Nir
>>>
>>>


 Nir


>
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Fernando,
>> I see each host has direct connection nfs mount, but yes, if main
>> host to which I connected nfs storage going down the storage becomes
>> unavailable and all vms are down
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Konstantin.
>>>
>>> That doesn`t make much sense make a whole cluster depend on a single
>>> host. From what I know any host talk directly to NFS Storage Array or
>>> whatever other Shared Storage you have.
>>> Have you tested that host going down if that affects the other with
>>> the NFS mounted directlly in a NFS Storage array ?
>>>
>>> Fernando
>>>
>>> 2017-04-15 12:42 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi >> >:
>>>
 In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
 If host goes down storage is not available.

 On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
 fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:

> Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage server
> for running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
> In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other type of
> storage, specially FC and iSCSI and performance is pretty much the 
> same, so
> you won`t get better results other than management going to other 
> type.
>
> Fernando
>
> 2017-04-15 5:25 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
> konra...@gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi guys,
>> I have one nfs storage,
>> it's connected through host1.
>> host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between
>> them.
>>
>> The question is - if host1 is down - all infrastructure is down,
>> since all traffic goes through host1,
>> is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?
>>
>> Only glusterfs?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list
>> Users@ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list
>> Users@ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
> ___
> Users mailing list
> Users@ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>

 ___
 Users mailing list
 Users@ovirt.org
 http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users



___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Konstantin Raskoshnyi]

"Corner cases"?
I tried to simulate crash of SPM server and ovirt kept trying to
reistablished connection to the failed node.


On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 8:10 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Nir Soffer  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 2:05 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer"  wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>>
 When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to perform
 the initial storage operations, but once the SD is defined, it's details
 are in the engine database, and all the hosts get connected to it directly.
 If the first host you used to define the SD goes down, all other hosts will
 still remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service, and if the current
 SPM host goes down, SPM gets started on another host in the DC. In short,
 unless your actual NFS exporting host goes down, there is no outage.

>>>
>>> There is no storage outage, but if you shutdown the spm host, the spm
>>> host
>>> will not move to a new host until the spm host is online again, or you
>>> confirm
>>> manually that the spm host was rebooted.
>>>
>>>
>>> In a properly configured setup the SBA should take care of that. That's
>>> the whole point of HA services
>>>
>>
>> In some cases like power loss or hardware failure, there is no way to
>> start
>> the spm host, and the system cannot recover automatically.
>>
>
> There are always corner cases, no doubt. But in a normal situation. where
> an SPM host goes down because of a hardware failure, it gets fenced, other
> hosts contend for SPM and start it. No surprises there.
>
>
>>
>> Nir
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Nir
>>>
>>>

 On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
 konra...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Fernando,
> I see each host has direct connection nfs mount, but yes, if main host
> to which I connected nfs storage going down the storage becomes 
> unavailable
> and all vms are down
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello Konstantin.
>>
>> That doesn`t make much sense make a whole cluster depend on a single
>> host. From what I know any host talk directly to NFS Storage Array or
>> whatever other Shared Storage you have.
>> Have you tested that host going down if that affects the other with
>> the NFS mounted directlly in a NFS Storage array ?
>>
>> Fernando
>>
>> 2017-04-15 12:42 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
>> :
>>
>>> In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
>>> If host goes down storage is not available.
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>>> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>>>
 Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage server
 for running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
 In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other type of
 storage, specially FC and iSCSI and performance is pretty much the 
 same, so
 you won`t get better results other than management going to other type.

 Fernando

 2017-04-15 5:25 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi >>> >:

> Hi guys,
> I have one nfs storage,
> it's connected through host1.
> host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between them.
>
> The question is - if host1 is down - all infrastructure is down,
> since all traffic goes through host1,
> is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?
>
> Only glusterfs?
>
> Thanks
>
>
> ___
> Users mailing list
> Users@ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>>
> ___
> Users mailing list
> Users@ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
 ___
 Users mailing list
 Users@ovirt.org
 http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

>>>
>>> ___
>>> Users mailing list
>>> Users@ovirt.org
>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>>
>>>
___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Dan Yasny]

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 12:44 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
wrote:

> What's SBA?
>

split brain avoidance mechanism


>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:05 AM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer"  wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>
>>> When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to perform
>>> the initial storage operations, but once the SD is defined, it's details
>>> are in the engine database, and all the hosts get connected to it directly.
>>> If the first host you used to define the SD goes down, all other hosts will
>>> still remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service, and if the current
>>> SPM host goes down, SPM gets started on another host in the DC. In short,
>>> unless your actual NFS exporting host goes down, there is no outage.
>>>
>>
>> There is no storage outage, but if you shutdown the spm host, the spm host
>> will not move to a new host until the spm host is online again, or you
>> confirm
>> manually that the spm host was rebooted.
>>
>>
>> In a properly configured setup the SBA should take care of that. That's
>> the whole point of HA services
>>
>>
>> Nir
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Fernando,
 I see each host has direct connection nfs mount, but yes, if main host
 to which I connected nfs storage going down the storage becomes unavailable
 and all vms are down


 On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
 fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:

> Hello Konstantin.
>
> That doesn`t make much sense make a whole cluster depend on a single
> host. From what I know any host talk directly to NFS Storage Array or
> whatever other Shared Storage you have.
> Have you tested that host going down if that affects the other with
> the NFS mounted directlly in a NFS Storage array ?
>
> Fernando
>
> 2017-04-15 12:42 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :
>
>> In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
>> If host goes down storage is not available.
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage server for
>>> running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
>>> In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other type of
>>> storage, specially FC and iSCSI and performance is pretty much the 
>>> same, so
>>> you won`t get better results other than management going to other type.
>>>
>>> Fernando
>>>
>>> 2017-04-15 5:25 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
>>> :
>>>
 Hi guys,
 I have one nfs storage,
 it's connected through host1.
 host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between them.

 The question is - if host1 is down - all infrastructure is down,
 since all traffic goes through host1,
 is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?

 Only glusterfs?

 Thanks


 ___
 Users mailing list
 Users@ovirt.org
 http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users


>
 ___
 Users mailing list
 Users@ovirt.org
 http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users


>>> ___
>>> Users mailing list
>>> Users@ovirt.org
>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list
>> Users@ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>>
___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Dan Yasny]

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Nir Soffer  wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 2:05 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer"  wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>
>>> When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to perform
>>> the initial storage operations, but once the SD is defined, it's details
>>> are in the engine database, and all the hosts get connected to it directly.
>>> If the first host you used to define the SD goes down, all other hosts will
>>> still remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service, and if the current
>>> SPM host goes down, SPM gets started on another host in the DC. In short,
>>> unless your actual NFS exporting host goes down, there is no outage.
>>>
>>
>> There is no storage outage, but if you shutdown the spm host, the spm host
>> will not move to a new host until the spm host is online again, or you
>> confirm
>> manually that the spm host was rebooted.
>>
>>
>> In a properly configured setup the SBA should take care of that. That's
>> the whole point of HA services
>>
>
> In some cases like power loss or hardware failure, there is no way to start
> the spm host, and the system cannot recover automatically.
>

There are always corner cases, no doubt. But in a normal situation. where
an SPM host goes down because of a hardware failure, it gets fenced, other
hosts contend for SPM and start it. No surprises there.


>
> Nir
>
>
>>
>>
>> Nir
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Fernando,
 I see each host has direct connection nfs mount, but yes, if main host
 to which I connected nfs storage going down the storage becomes unavailable
 and all vms are down


 On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
 fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:

> Hello Konstantin.
>
> That doesn`t make much sense make a whole cluster depend on a single
> host. From what I know any host talk directly to NFS Storage Array or
> whatever other Shared Storage you have.
> Have you tested that host going down if that affects the other with
> the NFS mounted directlly in a NFS Storage array ?
>
> Fernando
>
> 2017-04-15 12:42 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :
>
>> In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
>> If host goes down storage is not available.
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage server for
>>> running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
>>> In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other type of
>>> storage, specially FC and iSCSI and performance is pretty much the 
>>> same, so
>>> you won`t get better results other than management going to other type.
>>>
>>> Fernando
>>>
>>> 2017-04-15 5:25 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
>>> :
>>>
 Hi guys,
 I have one nfs storage,
 it's connected through host1.
 host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between them.

 The question is - if host1 is down - all infrastructure is down,
 since all traffic goes through host1,
 is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?

 Only glusterfs?

 Thanks


 ___
 Users mailing list
 Users@ovirt.org
 http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users


>
 ___
 Users mailing list
 Users@ovirt.org
 http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users


>>> ___
>>> Users mailing list
>>> Users@ovirt.org
>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list
>> Users@ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>>
___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Konstantin Raskoshnyi]

So what's the whole HA point then?

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:29 AM Nir Soffer  wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 2:05 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer"  wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>>
>>> When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to perform
>>> the initial storage operations, but once the SD is defined, it's details
>>> are in the engine database, and all the hosts get connected to it directly.
>>> If the first host you used to define the SD goes down, all other hosts will
>>> still remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service, and if the current
>>> SPM host goes down, SPM gets started on another host in the DC. In short,
>>> unless your actual NFS exporting host goes down, there is no outage.
>>>
>>
>> There is no storage outage, but if you shutdown the spm host, the spm host
>> will not move to a new host until the spm host is online again, or you
>> confirm
>> manually that the spm host was rebooted.
>>
>>
>> In a properly configured setup the SBA should take care of that. That's
>> the whole point of HA services
>>
>
> In some cases like power loss or hardware failure, there is no way to start
> the spm host, and the system cannot recover automatically.
>
> Nir
>
>
>>
>>
>> Nir
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Fernando,
 I see each host has direct connection nfs mount, but yes, if main host
 to which I connected nfs storage going down the storage becomes unavailable
 and all vms are down


 On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
 fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:

> Hello Konstantin.
>
> That doesn`t make much sense make a whole cluster depend on a single
> host. From what I know any host talk directly to NFS Storage Array or
> whatever other Shared Storage you have.
> Have you tested that host going down if that affects the other with
> the NFS mounted directlly in a NFS Storage array ?
>
> Fernando
>
> 2017-04-15 12:42 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :
>
>> In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
>> If host goes down storage is not available.
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage server for
>>> running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
>>> In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other type of
>>> storage, specially FC and iSCSI and performance is pretty much the 
>>> same, so
>>> you won`t get better results other than management going to other type.
>>>
>>> Fernando
>>>
>>> 2017-04-15 5:25 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
>>> :
>>>
 Hi guys,
 I have one nfs storage,
 it's connected through host1.
 host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between them.

 The question is - if host1 is down - all infrastructure is down,
 since all traffic goes through host1,
 is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?

 Only glusterfs?

 Thanks


 ___
 Users mailing list
 Users@ovirt.org
 http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users


>
 ___
 Users mailing list
 Users@ovirt.org
 http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users


>>> ___
>>> Users mailing list
>>> Users@ovirt.org
>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list
>> Users@ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>>
___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Konstantin Raskoshnyi]

What's SBA?

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:05 AM Dan Yasny  wrote:

>
>
> On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer"  wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
>> When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to perform
>> the initial storage operations, but once the SD is defined, it's details
>> are in the engine database, and all the hosts get connected to it directly.
>> If the first host you used to define the SD goes down, all other hosts will
>> still remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service, and if the current
>> SPM host goes down, SPM gets started on another host in the DC. In short,
>> unless your actual NFS exporting host goes down, there is no outage.
>>
>
> There is no storage outage, but if you shutdown the spm host, the spm host
> will not move to a new host until the spm host is online again, or you
> confirm
> manually that the spm host was rebooted.
>
>
> In a properly configured setup the SBA should take care of that. That's
> the whole point of HA services
>
>
> Nir
>
>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Fernando,
>>> I see each host has direct connection nfs mount, but yes, if main host
>>> to which I connected nfs storage going down the storage becomes unavailable
>>> and all vms are down
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>>> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hello Konstantin.

 That doesn`t make much sense make a whole cluster depend on a single
 host. From what I know any host talk directly to NFS Storage Array or
 whatever other Shared Storage you have.
 Have you tested that host going down if that affects the other with the
 NFS mounted directlly in a NFS Storage array ?

 Fernando

 2017-04-15 12:42 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :

> In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
> If host goes down storage is not available.
>
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>
>> Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage server for
>> running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
>> In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other type of
>> storage, specially FC and iSCSI and performance is pretty much the same, 
>> so
>> you won`t get better results other than management going to other type.
>>
>> Fernando
>>
>> 2017-04-15 5:25 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :
>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>> I have one nfs storage,
>>> it's connected through host1.
>>> host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between them.
>>>
>>> The question is - if host1 is down - all infrastructure is down,
>>> since all traffic goes through host1,
>>> is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?
>>>
>>> Only glusterfs?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Users mailing list
>>> Users@ovirt.org
>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>>

>>> ___
>>> Users mailing list
>>> Users@ovirt.org
>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list
>> Users@ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>
> ___
> Users mailing list
> Users@ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>
___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Nir Soffer]

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 2:05 PM Dan Yasny  wrote:

>
>
> On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer"  wrote:
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny  wrote:
>
>> When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to perform
>> the initial storage operations, but once the SD is defined, it's details
>> are in the engine database, and all the hosts get connected to it directly.
>> If the first host you used to define the SD goes down, all other hosts will
>> still remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service, and if the current
>> SPM host goes down, SPM gets started on another host in the DC. In short,
>> unless your actual NFS exporting host goes down, there is no outage.
>>
>
> There is no storage outage, but if you shutdown the spm host, the spm host
> will not move to a new host until the spm host is online again, or you
> confirm
> manually that the spm host was rebooted.
>
>
> In a properly configured setup the SBA should take care of that. That's
> the whole point of HA services
>

In some cases like power loss or hardware failure, there is no way to start
the spm host, and the system cannot recover automatically.

Nir


>
>
> Nir
>
>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi <
>> konra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Fernando,
>>> I see each host has direct connection nfs mount, but yes, if main host
>>> to which I connected nfs storage going down the storage becomes unavailable
>>> and all vms are down
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>>> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hello Konstantin.

 That doesn`t make much sense make a whole cluster depend on a single
 host. From what I know any host talk directly to NFS Storage Array or
 whatever other Shared Storage you have.
 Have you tested that host going down if that affects the other with the
 NFS mounted directlly in a NFS Storage array ?

 Fernando

 2017-04-15 12:42 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :

> In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
> If host goes down storage is not available.
>
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>
>> Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage server for
>> running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
>> In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other type of
>> storage, specially FC and iSCSI and performance is pretty much the same, 
>> so
>> you won`t get better results other than management going to other type.
>>
>> Fernando
>>
>> 2017-04-15 5:25 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :
>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>> I have one nfs storage,
>>> it's connected through host1.
>>> host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between them.
>>>
>>> The question is - if host1 is down - all infrastructure is down,
>>> since all traffic goes through host1,
>>> is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?
>>>
>>> Only glusterfs?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Users mailing list
>>> Users@ovirt.org
>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>>

>>> ___
>>> Users mailing list
>>> Users@ovirt.org
>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list
>> Users@ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>
> ___
> Users mailing list
> Users@ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>
___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Dan Yasny]

On Apr 16, 2017 7:01 AM, "Nir Soffer"  wrote:

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny  wrote:

> When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to perform
> the initial storage operations, but once the SD is defined, it's details
> are in the engine database, and all the hosts get connected to it directly.
> If the first host you used to define the SD goes down, all other hosts will
> still remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service, and if the current
> SPM host goes down, SPM gets started on another host in the DC. In short,
> unless your actual NFS exporting host goes down, there is no outage.
>

There is no storage outage, but if you shutdown the spm host, the spm host
will not move to a new host until the spm host is online again, or you
confirm
manually that the spm host was rebooted.


In a properly configured setup the SBA should take care of that. That's the
whole point of HA services


Nir


>
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi  > wrote:
>
>> Hi Fernando,
>> I see each host has direct connection nfs mount, but yes, if main host to
>> which I connected nfs storage going down the storage becomes unavailable
>> and all vms are down
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Konstantin.
>>>
>>> That doesn`t make much sense make a whole cluster depend on a single
>>> host. From what I know any host talk directly to NFS Storage Array or
>>> whatever other Shared Storage you have.
>>> Have you tested that host going down if that affects the other with the
>>> NFS mounted directlly in a NFS Storage array ?
>>>
>>> Fernando
>>>
>>> 2017-04-15 12:42 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :
>>>
 In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
 If host goes down storage is not available.

 On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
 fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:

> Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage server for
> running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
> In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other type of
> storage, specially FC and iSCSI and performance is pretty much the same, 
> so
> you won`t get better results other than management going to other type.
>
> Fernando
>
> 2017-04-15 5:25 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :
>
>> Hi guys,
>> I have one nfs storage,
>> it's connected through host1.
>> host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between them.
>>
>> The question is - if host1 is down - all infrastructure is down,
>> since all traffic goes through host1,
>> is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?
>>
>> Only glusterfs?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list
>> Users@ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list
>> Users@ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
> ___
> Users mailing list
> Users@ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>

___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Nir Soffer]

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 4:17 AM Dan Yasny  wrote:

> When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to perform
> the initial storage operations, but once the SD is defined, it's details
> are in the engine database, and all the hosts get connected to it directly.
> If the first host you used to define the SD goes down, all other hosts will
> still remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service, and if the current
> SPM host goes down, SPM gets started on another host in the DC. In short,
> unless your actual NFS exporting host goes down, there is no outage.
>

There is no storage outage, but if you shutdown the spm host, the spm host
will not move to a new host until the spm host is online again, or you
confirm
manually that the spm host was rebooted.

Nir


>
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi  > wrote:
>
>> Hi Fernando,
>> I see each host has direct connection nfs mount, but yes, if main host to
>> which I connected nfs storage going down the storage becomes unavailable
>> and all vms are down
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello Konstantin.
>>>
>>> That doesn`t make much sense make a whole cluster depend on a single
>>> host. From what I know any host talk directly to NFS Storage Array or
>>> whatever other Shared Storage you have.
>>> Have you tested that host going down if that affects the other with the
>>> NFS mounted directlly in a NFS Storage array ?
>>>
>>> Fernando
>>>
>>> 2017-04-15 12:42 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :
>>>
 In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
 If host goes down storage is not available.

 On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
 fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:

> Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage server for
> running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
> In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other type of
> storage, specially FC and iSCSI and performance is pretty much the same, 
> so
> you won`t get better results other than management going to other type.
>
> Fernando
>
> 2017-04-15 5:25 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :
>
>> Hi guys,
>> I have one nfs storage,
>> it's connected through host1.
>> host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between them.
>>
>> The question is - if host1 is down - all infrastructure is down,
>> since all traffic goes through host1,
>> is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?
>>
>> Only glusterfs?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list
>> Users@ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list
>> Users@ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
> ___
> Users mailing list
> Users@ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Dan Yasny]

When you set up a storage domain, you need to specify a host to perform the
initial storage operations, but once the SD is defined, it's details are in
the engine database, and all the hosts get connected to it directly. If the
first host you used to define the SD goes down, all other hosts will still
remain connected and work. SPM is an HA service, and if the current SPM
host goes down, SPM gets started on another host in the DC. In short,
unless your actual NFS exporting host goes down, there is no outage.

On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Konstantin Raskoshnyi 
wrote:

> Hi Fernando,
> I see each host has direct connection nfs mount, but yes, if main host to
> which I connected nfs storage going down the storage becomes unavailable
> and all vms are down
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello Konstantin.
>>
>> That doesn`t make much sense make a whole cluster depend on a single
>> host. From what I know any host talk directly to NFS Storage Array or
>> whatever other Shared Storage you have.
>> Have you tested that host going down if that affects the other with the
>> NFS mounted directlly in a NFS Storage array ?
>>
>> Fernando
>>
>> 2017-04-15 12:42 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :
>>
>>> In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
>>> If host goes down storage is not available.
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>>> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>>>
 Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage server for
 running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
 In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other type of storage,
 specially FC and iSCSI and performance is pretty much the same, so you
 won`t get better results other than management going to other type.

 Fernando

 2017-04-15 5:25 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :

> Hi guys,
> I have one nfs storage,
> it's connected through host1.
> host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between them.
>
> The question is - if host1 is down - all infrastructure is down, since
> all traffic goes through host1,
> is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?
>
> Only glusterfs?
>
> Thanks
>
>
> ___
> Users mailing list
> Users@ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>>
> ___
> Users mailing list
> Users@ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Konstantin Raskoshnyi]

Hi Fernando,
I see each host has direct connection nfs mount, but yes, if main host to
which I connected nfs storage going down the storage becomes unavailable
and all vms are down


On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:

> Hello Konstantin.
>
> That doesn`t make much sense make a whole cluster depend on a single host.
> From what I know any host talk directly to NFS Storage Array or whatever
> other Shared Storage you have.
> Have you tested that host going down if that affects the other with the
> NFS mounted directlly in a NFS Storage array ?
>
> Fernando
>
> 2017-04-15 12:42 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :
>
>> In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
>> If host goes down storage is not available.
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage server for
>>> running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
>>> In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other type of storage,
>>> specially FC and iSCSI and performance is pretty much the same, so you
>>> won`t get better results other than management going to other type.
>>>
>>> Fernando
>>>
>>> 2017-04-15 5:25 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :
>>>
 Hi guys,
 I have one nfs storage,
 it's connected through host1.
 host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between them.

 The question is - if host1 is down - all infrastructure is down, since
 all traffic goes through host1,
 is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?

 Only glusterfs?

 Thanks


 ___
 Users mailing list
 Users@ovirt.org
 http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users


>
___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Charles Kozler]

I think he means SPM? I've seen when node with SPM goes down it isn't
really seamless and takes a minute or two to catch up unless of course you
out that node in maintenance mode but that isn't possible if it crashes or
something

On Apr 15, 2017 1:38 PM, "FERNANDO FREDIANI" 
wrote:

> Hello Konstantin.
>
> That doesn`t make much sense make a whole cluster depend on a single host.
> From what I know any host talk directly to NFS Storage Array or whatever
> other Shared Storage you have.
> Have you tested that host going down if that affects the other with the
> NFS mounted directlly in a NFS Storage array ?
>
> Fernando
>
> 2017-04-15 12:42 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :
>
>> In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
>> If host goes down storage is not available.
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
>> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage server for
>>> running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
>>> In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other type of storage,
>>> specially FC and iSCSI and performance is pretty much the same, so you
>>> won`t get better results other than management going to other type.
>>>
>>> Fernando
>>>
>>> 2017-04-15 5:25 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :
>>>
 Hi guys,
 I have one nfs storage,
 it's connected through host1.
 host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between them.

 The question is - if host1 is down - all infrastructure is down, since
 all traffic goes through host1,
 is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?

 Only glusterfs?

 Thanks


 ___
 Users mailing list
 Users@ovirt.org
 http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users


>
> ___
> Users mailing list
> Users@ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[FERNANDO FREDIANI]

Hello Konstantin.

That doesn`t make much sense make a whole cluster depend on a single host.
>From what I know any host talk directly to NFS Storage Array or whatever
other Shared Storage you have.
Have you tested that host going down if that affects the other with the NFS
mounted directlly in a NFS Storage array ?

Fernando

2017-04-15 12:42 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :

> In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
> If host goes down storage is not available.
>
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI <
> fernando.fredi...@upx.com> wrote:
>
>> Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage server for
>> running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
>> In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other type of storage,
>> specially FC and iSCSI and performance is pretty much the same, so you
>> won`t get better results other than management going to other type.
>>
>> Fernando
>>
>> 2017-04-15 5:25 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :
>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>> I have one nfs storage,
>>> it's connected through host1.
>>> host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between them.
>>>
>>> The question is - if host1 is down - all infrastructure is down, since
>>> all traffic goes through host1,
>>> is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?
>>>
>>> Only glusterfs?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Users mailing list
>>> Users@ovirt.org
>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>>
___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Konstantin Raskoshnyi]

In ovirt you have to attach storage through specific host.
If host goes down storage is not available.

On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 7:31 AM FERNANDO FREDIANI 
wrote:

> Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage server for
> running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
> In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other type of storage,
> specially FC and iSCSI and performance is pretty much the same, so you
> won`t get better results other than management going to other type.
>
> Fernando
>
> 2017-04-15 5:25 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :
>
>> Hi guys,
>> I have one nfs storage,
>> it's connected through host1.
>> host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between them.
>>
>> The question is - if host1 is down - all infrastructure is down, since
>> all traffic goes through host1,
>> is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?
>>
>> Only glusterfs?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Users mailing list
>> Users@ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[FERNANDO FREDIANI]

Well, make it not go through host1 and dedicate a storage server for
running NFS and make both hosts connect to it.
In my view NFS is much easier to manage than any other type of storage,
specially FC and iSCSI and performance is pretty much the same, so you
won`t get better results other than management going to other type.

Fernando

2017-04-15 5:25 GMT-03:00 Konstantin Raskoshnyi :

> Hi guys,
> I have one nfs storage,
> it's connected through host1.
> host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between them.
>
> The question is - if host1 is down - all infrastructure is down, since all
> traffic goes through host1,
> is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?
>
> Only glusterfs?
>
> Thanks
>
>
> ___
> Users mailing list
> Users@ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Re: [ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Niyazi Elvan]

You can use FC storage where luns come from a redundant storage array.



On Apr 15, 2017 11:25, "Konstantin Raskoshnyi"  wrote:

Hi guys,
I have one nfs storage,
it's connected through host1.
host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between them.

The question is - if host1 is down - all infrastructure is down, since all
traffic goes through host1,
is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?

Only glusterfs?

Thanks


___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

[ovirt-users] storage redundancy in Ovirt

[Konstantin Raskoshnyi]

Hi guys,
I have one nfs storage,
it's connected through host1.
host2 also has access to it, I can easily migrate vms between them.

The question is - if host1 is down - all infrastructure is down, since all
traffic goes through host1,
is there any way in oVirt to use redundant storage?

Only glusterfs?

Thanks
___
Users mailing list
Users@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users