Re: CentOS Cluster LVM
Matthew Bowie <[email protected]> Mon, 4 May 2009 11:52:08 -0600
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.user-groups.nmlug |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
We've been pretty happy using Citrix XenServer 5 VM hosts against ZFS (OpenSolaris) backed iSCSI shares. It's not synchronous, but zfs send/recv is low enough overhead that we could do it every 10-15 minutes (~20 VMs), although every hour is enough for us. Matthew Bowie On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 11:33 AM, Ed Heron <Ed-MBvgLuVkLo/[email protected]> wrote: > > From: "Pete Zaitcev", Monday, May 04, 2009 10:51 AM > >> On Mon, 4 May 2009 09:40:56 -0600, "Ed Heron" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Anybody using clustered LVM on CentOS 5 to provide drive space for virtual >>> machines on a GNU/Linux/Xen host? >> >> Not I, but it would be interesting to hear if anyone does it. > > I will share my experiences. This very cool stuff. > >>> The docs for Clustered LVM appear to suggest the storage server could >>> mirror the virtual drive space onto another storage server on the fly. This >>> could provide a low apparent cost redundant system. >> >> Do you mean that there's no man-hour cost associated with learning >> setting up Xen-based active migration or how Xen incurs capacity >> costs? > > No. By 'low apparent cost', I'm suggesting management doesn't always notice man-hour costs, but that those costs are still significant. > >> I use non-clustered LVM so that I can shut VM down (well, usually it's >> when the box is dead by itself :-)), dd it over and reboot. So there's >> a downtime during the transfer, which I thought acceptable. > > Are you using a remote (to the virtual machine host) LVM storage device? > > _______________________________________________ > NMLUG mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.b9.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nmlug _______________________________________________ NMLUG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.b9.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nmlug