This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


RE: [Xen-users] high availability iscsi and xen setup

To: <lists@xxxxxxxxx>, "Mark Adams" <mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-users] high availability iscsi and xen setup
From: "James Harper" <james.harper@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 10:13:01 +1100
Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Thu, 04 Nov 2010 16:14:14 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1288882004.2472.16.camel@E4310>
List-help: <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-users@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <20101104125830.GA15851@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1288882004.2472.16.camel@E4310>
Sender: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: Act8L18W7huOFcg0RJChcsZqQldznwARe4xA
Thread-topic: [Xen-users] high availability iscsi and xen setup
> > - Is a clustered filesystem required?
> NOT required, but im testing another kind of such a setup. My receipt is
> to run XEN-Boxes with glusterfs as filebases-Diskbackend...
> http://www.gluster.com/community/documentation/index.php/GlusterFS_and_Xen
> first tests were impressive and performance was higher than iscsi, since
> im running ~60VMs over 10GBit-Nics, where the iscsi-targets were the
> bottleneck :-(

That's the way the Microsoft literature recommends for Hyper-V on a SAN. They 
use VHD files on a shared filesystem. I guess because you can lock the entire 
VHD file you mitigate a lot of the performance problems of a shared filesystem 
as each host is using its own chunk of the filesystem holding its VHD file. I 
assume that 'dynamic' VHD's that grow on demand take a bit of a performance hit 
when they need to grow though.

I'm impressed that the performance is actually higher that raw iSCSI. Do you 
have an explanation for that? How is each host accessing the shared storage?


Xen-users mailing list