On 05/26 10:20, Barak Korren wrote: > > > > > > I agree a stable distributed storage solution is the way to go if we can > > find one :) > > > > Distributed storages usually suffer from a large overhead because: > 1. They try to be resilient to node failure, which means keeping two > or more copies of the same file, which results in I/O overhead. > 2. They need to coordinate metadata access for large amounts of files. > Bottlenecks in the metadata management system are a common issue for > distributes FS storages. > > Since most of our data is ephemeral anyway I don't think we need to > pay this overhead.
The solution for our current temporary ephemeral data would be for each node
to create the vms locally, that's the scratch disks solution we started with.
The distributed storage would be used to store the jenkins machines templates,
that mostly would be read by the hosts, and thus, properly cached locally with
a low miss rate (as they don't usually change). To actually not use at all the
central storage, whose extra levels of redundancy are only useful for more
critical data (aka production datacenter machines).
>
>
> --
> Barak Korren
> bkor...@redhat.com
> RHEV-CI Team
--
David Caro
Red Hat S.L.
Continuous Integration Engineer - EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D
Tel.: +420 532 294 605
Email: dc...@redhat.com
IRC: dcaro|dcaroest@{freenode|oftc|redhat}
Web: www.redhat.com
RHT Global #: 82-62605
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Infra mailing list Infra@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
