WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

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/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-users

Re: [Xen-users] High Number of VMs

To: xen-users list <xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] High Number of VMs
From: Ciro Iriarte <cyruspy@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2011 18:03:48 -0400
Delivery-date: Fri, 09 Sep 2011 15:04:32 -0700
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=2xL3Q5behgszOmzv5ywLPr5Mdwjh1tyf7JS4IvDvUsI=; b=PhETI8QReHi5Vi0HUEjC050lxQnRXZPIGHJ+5BEtz5tNsm9scVbMHk9a9gFq9R0bxD dDQBL67tj42tl2ODNOM+g5ta4Pk5qCd1o3VR2u1j/EC3941n04bg1F5RqKX6NRWQpPVZ 5fB7U7eV2615t29JT1jErybIW0Q4+UyVmY83w=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4E6A8A4D.7050204@xxxxxxxxxxx>
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: <CAEaLa5F=T-M2tFYrVjpoSF820b_YsyFX3pFSUMBheJdOxj5xxg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4E6A8A4D.7050204@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
2011/9/9 John Madden <jmadden@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On 09/09/2011 03:07 PM, Ciro Iriarte wrote:
>>
>> Hi, I'm curious about how you guys deal with big virtualization
>> installations. To this date we only dealt with a small number of VM's
>> (~10)on not too big hardware (2xquad xeons+16GB ram). As I'm the
>> "storage guy" I find it quite convenient to present to the dom0s one
>> LUN per VM that makes live migration possible but without the cluster
>> file system or cLVM complexity. The thing is that Linux has a 255 SCSI
>> device limit apparently (255/2= ~128 with multipath) and that won't
>> scale in big installations (300 VMs for example).
>>
>> Any experiences on this scale?
>
> I run a couple hundred VM's across a handful of blades.  I recommend going
> to fewer, larger LUNs, carving them up with LVM, and handing out LV's to
> your VM's.  You don't actually need cLVM to do this!  All the cluster infra
> does (for its nasty administrative overhead) is keep the LVM metadata (not
> your actual data) consistent through cluster-wide locks.  You can manage
> yourself by, for example, making changes on one node and refreshing the
> other nodes with things like 'vgscan -ay'.  I typically allocate LUNs 500GB
> at a time.  You can invent means of keeping things consistent that work for
> your environment, just test them first.
>
> If you really want data security -- preventing one node from hosing data
> that's accessible from another node -- you'll have to go with a cluster
> filesystem.  That still doesn't help keep your multipathing and LVM configs
> consistent though, so I think you're better off just skipping that step.
>
> John
>
>
Any advantage on using large luns+LVM instead of independent LUNs
appart from snapshots? (according to Novell support LVM on top of LVM
is a bad thing...). I remember reading that Xen itself implements some
kind of locking...

Regards,

-- 
Ciro Iriarte
http://cyruspy.wordpress.com
--

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>