Re: [Xen-users] Image file or partitions over an iSCSI?

["Fajar A. Nugraha" <fajar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ivan Porro wrote:
>
> The server(s) will have a raid 1 with two 74GB sas 15krpm drives.
> Where do you would store your VMs?
> You would use partitions (i.e. a LUN for each VM) or images?
LUNs.
> Swap files could be on the local disks?
Yes, this will lead to better performance, but it will also prevent live
migration.
If you need live migration, use LUNs on SAN for swap as well.
> Does a "local disk images and overnight mirror to the SAN" approach
> would be better in this case?
>
For this to work you need to have snapshot, to make sure that the disk
images are consistent.
Generally I wouldn't bother, just put your VMs on SAN.
> Religion question (optional...):
>
> Waht would you prefere?
>
> [ ] CentOS 5 with out of the box Xen
> [ ] CentOS 5 with latest Xen
I'd go with CentOS.

As for Xen, depends on what you need. Out-of-the-box Xen will make
sysadmin task easier, as it will be part of the OS. It should work for
most scenarios, and it's the one I'd recommend for general use.

Latest Xen will get you more features (such as the ability tu run
Solaris domU on Linux dom0), but it will be somewhat harder on sysadmin
(imagine having 100 boxes, and you have to update Xen on all of them).

Regards,

Fajar

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