Kyle,
Thanks for your prompt reply. I have been doing some further reading and planning after receiving your valuable input. >> 1. Is it possible to install Ceph and Ceph monitors on the the XCP >> (XEN) Dom0 or would we need to install it on the DomU containing the >> Openstack components? >I'm not a Xen guru but in the case of KVM I would run the OSDs on the >hypervisor to avoid virtualization overhead. As you have suggested, our plan is to install Ceph at the hypervisor level, ie: Dom0 >> 2. Is Ceph server aware, or Rack aware so that replicas are not stored >> on the same server? >Yes, placement is defined with your crush map and placement rules. >> 3. Are 4Tb OSD’s too large? We are attempting to restrict the qty of >> OSD’s per server to minimise system overhead >Nope! >> Any other feedback regarding our plan would also be welcomed. >I would probably run each disk as it's own OSD, which means you need a bit >more memory per host. Networking could certainly be a bottleneck with 8 to 16 >spindle nodes. YMMV. I had contemplated having 1 OSD per spindle, but my worry was both processing and RAM overhead as well as network bottlenecks. (ie: no budget for 10Gbe) 5. Will 2 x Bonded 1Gbe be sufficient for block storage for 7 – 10 hypervisors with OSD’s on each made up of 4 x RAID0 7200RPM SAS drives & from user experience, what sort of data throughput would I expect to see? Thanks Paul -----Original Message----- From: Kyle Bader [mailto:kyle.ba...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, 12 March 2014 7:56 AM To: Paul Mitchener Cc: ceph-users Subject: Re: [ceph-users] Utilizing DAS on XEN or XCP hosts for Openstack Cinder > 1. Is it possible to install Ceph and Ceph monitors on the the XCP > (XEN) Dom0 or would we need to install it on the DomU containing the > Openstack components? I'm not a Xen guru but in the case of KVM I would run the OSDs on the hypervisor to avoid virtualization overhead. > 2. Is Ceph server aware, or Rack aware so that replicas are not stored > on the same server? Yes, placement is defined with your crush map and placement rules. > 3. Are 4Tb OSD’s too large? We are attempting to restrict the qty of > OSD’s per server to minimise system overhead Nope! > Any other feedback regarding our plan would also be welcomed. I would probably run each disk as it's own OSD, which means you need a bit more memory per host. Networking could certainly be a bottleneck with 8 to 16 spindle nodes. YMMV. -- Kyle ############################################################################## This e-mail message has been scanned for Viruses and Content and cleared by AUS-IP SecurMail ( <http://www.ausip.net.au/securmail> http://www.ausip.net.au/securmail) at 8:56:28 PM on 11 Mar 2014 ##############################################################################
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
