Re: [Xen-users] Xen + SAN

["Fajar A. Nugraha" <list@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 3:32 AM, Shaun Reitan
<mailinglists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I'm just curious what some of you guys out there are using for remote
> storage with XEN.  We currently are a service provider using xen for our
> customers virtual servers.  Right now each server is deployed with a raid
> controller and 4 disks in a raid 10 configuration.  The raid controller +
> BBU are not cheap and add an extra expense to the server. Not only that but
> disk IO is what causes us to deploy a new host.  For the most part these
> servers end up with a lot of unused Ram, CPU, and Disk Space.  What we are
> considering doing is setting up a SAN, something like a 48 disk raid 10
> array that the hosts can be attached to some how.

Other than I/O requirement, do you need SAN?

If you only need it for I/O, then there are other options which are
both cheaper and easier to manage, which includes (but not limited
to):
- servers with lots of internal disk (something with 16 x 2.5" disk is
quite common)
- DAS/external JBOD array
- go for SSD (some providers have taken this route)

If you need SAN for other purposes (e.g. live migration), then others
have already provided some good example. However, personally I'd check
again with the requirement. It's possible that the "best" setup for
you might be:
- a zfs-based storage appliance (e.g. napp-it, nexentastor) with lots
of disks (mirror), lots of memory, and SSD for L2ARC/SLOG to provide
high I/O throughput
- nfs and image-based disks to provide easy management
- tap:aio or tap:vhd on Xen side

-- 
Fajar

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