Can you suggest a way I could benchmark all these things?
I've never benchmarked Hard Drives before..
From: Robert Dunkley
[mailto:Robert@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thu 17/06/2010 10:06
To:
Jonathan Tripathy; Adi Kriegisch;
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [Xen-users] RAID10
Array
Hi,
I
like the sound of idea 1 best. One big Raid 10 might sound nice but are you sure
it is purely bandwidth you need. For small file latency I think a number of
smaller arrays spread between the different VMs might be faster (eg. 4 Raid 10
or 4 Raid 5). Seperate arrays also provides some degree of performance
isolation between the LUNs. The Raid 1 part of raid 10 does allow for read
interleaving but if you have random mixed reads and writes occurring fairly
evenly across the VMs then separate arrays should be more responsive (Even with
read and write caching enabled on the raid card).
The
way to find out is to benchmark with multiple VMs simultaneously.
Rob
From:
xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jonathan
Tripathy
Sent: 17 June 2010 09:09
To: Adi Kriegisch;
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [Xen-users] RAID10
Array
From: Adi Kriegisch
[mailto:kriegisch@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thu 17/06/2010 08:32
To:
Jonathan Tripathy
Cc: Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject:
Re: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array
Hi!
> I have 3 RAID ideas, and I'd
appreciate some advice on which would be
> better for lots of VMs for
customers.
>
> My storage server will be able to hold 16 disks. I am
going to export 1
> iSCSI LUN to each xen node. 6 nodes will connect to
one storage server,
> so that's 6 LUNs per server of equal size. The
server will connect to a
> switch using quad port bonded NICs (802.3ad),
and each Xen node will
> connect to the switch using Dual port bonded
NICs.
hmmm... with one LUN per server you will loose the ability to do
live
migration -- or do I miss something?
Some people mention problems
with bonding more than two NICs for iSCSI as
the reordering of the
commands/packets adds tremendously to latency and load.
If you want high
performance and avoid latency issues you might want to
choose
ATA-over-Ethernet.
> I'd appreciate any thoughts or ideas on which
would be best for
> throughput/IPOS
Your server is a Linux box
exporting the RAIDs to your Xen servers? Then
just take fio and do some
benchmarking. If you're using software raid than
you might want to add RAID5
to the equation.
I'd suggest to measure performance of your RAID system with
various
configurations and then choose which level of isolation gives the
best
performance.
I don't think a setup with 6 hot spare disks is
necessary -- at least not
when they're connected to the same server.
Depending on the quality of your
disks 1 to 3 should suffice. With eg. 1 hot
spare in the server plus some
cold spares in your office you should be able
to survive a broken harddisk.
You should also "smartctl -t long" your disks
frequently (ie once per week)
and do more or less permanent resync of your
raid to be able to detect
disk errors early. (The worst case scenario is to
never check your disks --
then a disk is broken and replaced by a hot/cold
spare -- and raid resync
fails other disks on your array, just because the
bad blocks are already
there...)
Hope this helps
--
Adi
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Adi,
The RAID controller I'm
planning to use is the MegaRAID SAS 9260-4i. The storage server will be
built by Broadberry, so it will be using Supermicro kit.
As for the O/S on the server, I was thinking of using Windows
Storage Server actually, however maybe this is a bad idea? You're correct about
the live migration, however I may implement some sort of clustering iSCSI
filesystem, however the main issue at the minute is the RAID array.
I've heard the same things about bonding 2 vs 4 NICs as
well.
Currently, I'm leaning towards the RAID10 array with 14 disks
with 2 hot spares
The
SAQ Group
Registered
Office: 18 Chapel Street, Petersfield, Hampshire GU32 3DZ
SAQ
is the trading name of SEMTEC Limited. Registered in England &
Wales
Company Number: 06481952
http://www.saqnet.co.uk AS29219
SAQ
Group Delivers high quality, honestly priced communication and I.T. services to
UK Business.
Broadband :
Domains : Email : Hosting : CoLo : Servers : Racks : Transit : Backups : Managed
Networks : Remote Support.
ISPA Member