[Openstack] Wasted Compute node disk space
Joshua McKenty
jmckenty at gmail.com
Tue Jan 8 22:28:57 UTC 2013
Greg - this is how we do it. See "Null-Tier Architecture" at http://www.pistoncloud.com/cloud-technology/cloud-architecture/ . Note that it's not just CPU - you end up needing more RAM and Network bandwidth as well.
Joshua
On Jan 8, 2013, at 8:22 AM, Greg Chavez <greg.chavez at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Razique,
>
> Yes. We have the OS on a RAID 1 and the rest of the disks are in a RAID 10. However, should we go with the Compute+Swift Node architecture, we'll be using this:
>
> [root at kvm-cs-gen-09i ~]# df -h
> Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> /dev/mapper/vg00-root
> 130G 1.9G 122G 2% /
> tmpfs 379G 0 379G 0% /dev/shm
> /dev/sda1 194M 33M 152M 18% /boot
> /dev/sdb1 559G 33M 559G 1% /swift1
> /dev/sdc1 559G 33M 559G 1% /swift2
> /dev/sdd1 559G 33M 559G 1% /swift3
> /dev/sde1 559G 33M 559G 1% /swift4
> /dev/sdf1 559G 33M 559G 1% /swift5
> /dev/sdg1 559G 33M 559G 1% /swift6
> /dev/sdh1 559G 33M 559G 1% /swift7
> /dev/sdi1 559G 33M 559G 1% /swift8
>
> What do you think?
>
> --Greg
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Razique Mahroua <razique.mahroua at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Greg,
> so if I understand well, you want to have the disk on the hypervisors be used as Swift nodes right?
> is there any underlying RAID?
>
> Regards,
> Razique Mahroua - Nuage & Co
> razique.mahroua at gmail.com
> Tel : +33 9 72 37 94 15
>
> <NUAGECO-LOGO-Fblan_petit.jpg>
>
> Le 8 janv. 2013 à 16:28, Greg Chavez <greg.chavez at gmail.com> a écrit :
>
>>
>> We are in the process of replacing our Diablo KVM infrastructure with Folsom. Up until now, our virts have been using the local Compute node's disk space for their images which, obviously, defeats much of the purpose of a virtualizing. We are ready to implement an iSCSI SAN, but we're a bit bummed that we're going to essentially be wasting the copious disk space on all the systems we ordered to serve as Compute nodes.
>>
>> SO... we were' thinking about doubling up our Compute nodes and Swift storage nodes, fully aware that this might require us to reserve more cores for the KVM host.
>>
>> Has any one else tried this? Is this clearly a bad, bad, bad idea?
>>
>> Thanks.
>> --
>> \*..+.-
>> --Greg Chavez
>> +//..;};
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>> Post to : openstack at lists.launchpad.net
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> Post to : openstack at lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack/attachments/20130108/252e1780/attachment.html>
More information about the Openstack
mailing list