Seem's to me that my comment didn't get through to the list, for some reason. http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/xen/api/205026?page=last atleast it's not present there. Is there a reason for this?
I have On 20 April 2011 11:25, Tim Titley <[email protected]> wrote: > Sounds interesting and definately worth looking into. You would not have > the advantage of snapshots like you do with an LVM type solution, but it may > pay off in some instances from a performance perspective. > > I've never used InfiniBand, but I think you've just convinced me to go buy > a few cheap adaptors and have a little play. > > On 19/04/11 23:39, Henrik Andersson wrote: > > Now that VastSky has been reported to be on hiatus atleast, I'dd like to > propose GlusterFS as a candidate. It is well tested and actively developed > and maintained project. I'm personally really interested in "RDMA version". > It should provide really low latencies and since 40Gbit InfiniBand is a > bargain compared to 10GbE, there should be more than enough throughput > availeable. > > This would require IB support on XCP but my thinking is, it would be > beneficial in many other ways. For example I would imagine RDMA could be > used with live migrates. > > -Henrik Andersson > > On 20 April 2011 01:10, Tim Titley <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Has anyone considered a replacement for the vastsky storage backend now >> that the project is officially dead (at least for now)? >> >> I have been looking at Ceph ( http://ceph.newdream.net/ ). A suggestion >> to someone so inclined to do something about it, may be to use the Rados >> block device (RBD) and put an LVM storage group on it, which would require >> modification of the current LVM storage manager code - I assume similar to >> LVMOISCSI. >> >> This would provide scalable, redundant storage at what I assume would be >> reasonable performance since the data can be striped across many storage >> nodes. >> >> Development seems reasonably active and although the project is not >> officially production quality yet, it is part of the Linux kernel which >> looks promising, as does the news that they will be providing commercial >> support. >> >> The only downside is that RBD requires a 2.6.37 kernel. For those "in the >> know" - how long will it be before this kernel makes it to XCP - considering >> that this vanilla kernel supposedly works in dom0 (I have yet to get it >> working)? >> >> Any thoughts? >> >> Regards, >> >> Tim >> >> _______________________________________________ >> xen-api mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-api >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > xen-api mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-api > >
_______________________________________________ xen-api mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-api
