On 2013-05-24T12:41:18, David Vossel <dvos...@redhat.com> wrote:
> I would think vm disk IO would be improved if the image didn't live on shared
> storage.
This I doubt. Writing to shared storage (like a SAN, for example) is
typically quite fast; the OCFS2/GFS2/cLVM2 overhead tends to show up
briefly when creating/opening the file, but not during actual IO.
(Especially not since no real concurrent write/read to the image
happens in the first place.)
> Keeping the image in sync across the cluster might be tricky. We would
> undefine the vm on the source after the migration, but if things got hairy
> with node failures there is the potential an older image could boot.
One could just layer this on top of drbd, or periodic rsyncs of the
image. Or use Gluster/ceph.
But if this is anything related to Cloud, I'm *sure* they'll reimplement
it ;-)
Regards,
Lars
--
Architect Storage/HA
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB
21284 (AG Nürnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
Linux-HA@lists.linux-ha.org
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
