On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 11:11 PM, Trevor Francis <[email protected]> wrote: > Good question. This is a private cloud for an application we have developed. > We will have no actual "public" users installing OS' of varying ranges. > > That being said. Cent 6.3 64-bit, is the only guest OS being deployed. It is > also what I am intending to deploy my NFS using. >
Then ISCSI would be a good choice is you have speed at the disk layer, no sense slowing it down with NFS. > Yes, I know that ZFS rocks and FreeBSD is the bees knees, but we know Cent > and everything on our platform is standardized around that (short of > XenServer hosts). Also, we don't need to take advantage of ZFS caching, as > all of our deployed storage for guests is SSD anyway. > > Thanks! > > TGF > > > > > On Oct 28, 2012, at 9:56 PM, Jason Davis <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Decent read: >> http://lass.cs.umass.edu/papers/pdf/FAST04.pdf >> >> As far as CS + XenServer, I prefer NFS. Easier to manage, thin provisioning >> works from the get go (which is super important as XenServer uses CoW >> (linked clones) iterations from the template you use.) By default, XS uses >> LVM over iSCSI with iSCSI which can be confusing to administer. That and it >> doesn't thin provision... which sucks... >> >> In theory there are latency penalties with NFS (as mentioned in the paper) >> but in a live deployment, I never ran into this. >> On Oct 28, 2012 9:03 PM, "Trevor Francis" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> I know this has been discussed on other forums with limited success in >>> explaining which is best in for aproduction environment, but could you >>> cloudstackers weigh in which storage technology would be best for both >>> primary and secondary storage for VMs running on Xenserver? Both are pretty >>> trivial to setup with NFS being the easiest. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Trevor Francis >>> >>> >>> >
