Open Stack

On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Joe Topjian <joe.topjian at cybera.ca> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 5:12 PM, Michael Still <mikal at stillhq.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Joe Topjian <joe.topjian at cybera.ca>
>> wrote:
>> > It would, yes, but I think your caveat trumps that idea. Having x nodes
>> > be
>> > able to work with a shared _base directory is great for saving space and
>> > centrally using images. As an example, one of my OpenStack's _base
>> > directory
>> > is 650gb in size. It's currently shared via NFS. If it was not shared or
>> > used a _base_$host scheme, that would be 650gb per compute node. 10
>> > nodes
>> > and you're already at 6.5TB.
>>
>> Is that _base directory so large because its never been cleaned up
>> though? What sort of maintenance are you performing on it?
>
> It's true that I haven't done any maintenance to _base. From my estimations,
> a cleanup wouldn't reclaim a substantial amount of space to warrant me doing
> an actual cleanup (basically "benefits of disk space reclaimed" is not
> greater than "risk of accidentally corrupting x users instances" yet).

What release of openstack are you running? I think you might get
significant benefits from turning cleanup on, so long as you're using
grizzly [1]. I'd be very very interested in the results of a lab test.

Michael

1: yes I know its not released yet, but if you found a bug now we
could fix it before it hurts everyone else...