Other than going through a "for" loop and deploying VM after VM, I don't think CloudStack currently supports a bulk-VM-deploy operation.
It would be nice if CS did so at some point in the future; however, that is probably a separate proposal from Hieu's. On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 12:13 AM, Amit Das <amit....@cloudbyte.com> wrote: > Hi Hieu, > > Will it be good to include bulk operation of this feature? In addition, > does Xen support parallel execution of these operations ? > > Regards, > Amit > *CloudByte Inc.* <http://www.cloudbyte.com/> > > > On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Hieu LE <hieul...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Mike, Punith, > > > > Please review "Golden Primary Storage" proposal. [1] > > > > Thank you. > > > > [1]: > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Golden+Primary+Storage > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 10:32 PM, Mike Tutkowski < > > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote: > > > >> Daan helped out with this. You should be good to go now. > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 8:50 PM, Hieu LE <hieul...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > Hi Mike, > >> > > >> > Could you please give edit/create permission on ASF Jira/Wiki > >> confluence ? > >> > I can not add a new Wiki page. > >> > > >> > My Jira ID: hieulq > >> > Wiki: hieulq89 > >> > Review Board: hieulq > >> > > >> > Thanks ! > >> > > >> > > >> > On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:17 AM, Mike Tutkowski < > >> > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com > >> > > wrote: > >> > > >> > > Hi, > >> > > > >> > > Yes, please feel free to add a new Wiki page for your design. > >> > > > >> > > Here is a link to applicable design info: > >> > > > >> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Design > >> > > > >> > > Also, feel free to ask more questions and have me review your > design. > >> > > > >> > > Thanks! > >> > > Mike > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Hieu LE <hieul...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > Hi Mike, > >> > > > > >> > > > You are right, performance will be decreased over time because > >> writes > >> > > IOPS > >> > > > will always end up on slower storage pool. > >> > > > > >> > > > In our case, we are using CloudStack integrated in VDI solution to > >> > > provived > >> > > > pooled VM type[1]. So may be my approach can bring better UX for > >> user > >> > > with > >> > > > lower bootime ... > >> > > > > >> > > > A short change in design are followings > >> > > > - VM will be deployed with golden primary storage if primary > >> storage is > >> > > > marked golden and this VM template is also marked as golden. > >> > > > - Choosing the best deploy destionation for both golden primary > >> storage > >> > > and > >> > > > normal root volume primary storage. Chosen host can also access > both > >> > > > storage pools. > >> > > > - New Xen Server plug-in for modifying VHD parent id. > >> > > > > >> > > > Is there some place for me to submit my design and code. Can I > >> write a > >> > > new > >> > > > proposal in CS wiki ? > >> > > > > >> > > > [1]: > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > http://support.citrix.com/proddocs/topic/xendesktop-rho/cds-choose-scheme-type-rho.html > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Mike Tutkowski < > >> > > > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com > >> > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > It is an interesting idea. If the constraints you face at your > >> > company > >> > > > can > >> > > > > be corrected somewhat by implementing this, then you should go > for > >> > it. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > It sounds like writes will be placed on the slower storage pool. > >> This > >> > > > means > >> > > > > as you update OS components, those updates will be placed on the > >> > slower > >> > > > > storage pool. As such, your performance is likely to somewhat > >> > decrease > >> > > > over > >> > > > > time (as more and more writes end up on the slower storage > pool). > >> > > > > > >> > > > > That may be OK for your use case(s), though. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > You'll have to update the storage-pool orchestration logic to > take > >> > this > >> > > > new > >> > > > > scheme into account. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Also, we'll have to figure out how this ties into storage > tagging > >> (if > >> > > at > >> > > > > all). > >> > > > > > >> > > > > I'd be happy to review your design and code. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 1:54 AM, Hieu LE <hieul...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks Mike and Punith for quick reply. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Both solutions you gave here are absolutely correct. But as I > >> > > mentioned > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > > the first email, I want another better solution for current > >> > > > > infrastructure > >> > > > > > at my company. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Creating a high IOPS primary storage using storage tags is > good > >> but > >> > > it > >> > > > > will > >> > > > > > be very waste of disk capacity. For example, if I only have > 1TB > >> SSD > >> > > and > >> > > > > > deploy 100 VM from a 100GB template. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > So I think about a solution where a high IOPS primary storage > >> can > >> > > only > >> > > > > > store golden image (master image), and a child image of this > VM > >> > will > >> > > be > >> > > > > > stored in another normal (NFS, ISCSI...) storage. In this > case, > >> > with > >> > > > 1TB > >> > > > > > SSD Primary Storage I can store as much golden image as I > need. > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > I have also tested it with 256 GB SSD mounted on Xen Server > >> 6.2.0 > >> > > with > >> > > > > 2TB > >> > > > > > local storage 10000RPM, 6TB NFS share storage with 1GB > network. > >> The > >> > > > IOPS > >> > > > > of > >> > > > > > VMs which have golden image (master image) in SSD and child > >> image > >> > in > >> > > > NFS > >> > > > > > increate more than 30-40% compare with VMs which have both > >> golden > >> > > image > >> > > > > and > >> > > > > > child image in NFS. The boot time of each VM is also decrease. > >> > > ('cause > >> > > > > > golden image in SSD only reduced READ IOPS). > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Do you think this approach OK ? > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 12:50 PM, Mike Tutkowski < > >> > > > > > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks, Punith - this is similar to what I was going to say. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Any time a set of CloudStack volumes share IOPS from a > common > >> > pool, > >> > > > you > >> > > > > > > cannot guarantee IOPS to a given CloudStack volume at a > given > >> > time. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Your choices at present are: > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > 1) Use managed storage (where you can create a 1:1 mapping > >> > between > >> > > a > >> > > > > > > CloudStack volume and a volume on a storage system that has > >> QoS). > >> > > As > >> > > > > > Punith > >> > > > > > > mentioned, this requires that you purchase storage from a > >> vendor > >> > > who > >> > > > > > > provides guaranteed QoS on a volume-by-volume bases AND has > >> this > >> > > > > > integrated > >> > > > > > > into CloudStack. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > 2) Create primary storage in CloudStack that is not managed, > >> but > >> > > has > >> > > > a > >> > > > > > high > >> > > > > > > number of IOPS (ex. using SSDs). You can then storage tag > this > >> > > > primary > >> > > > > > > storage and create Compute and Disk Offerings that use this > >> > storage > >> > > > tag > >> > > > > > to > >> > > > > > > make sure their volumes end up on this storage pool (primary > >> > > > storage). > >> > > > > > This > >> > > > > > > will still not guarantee IOPS on a CloudStack > volume-by-volume > >> > > basis, > >> > > > > but > >> > > > > > > it will at least place the CloudStack volumes that need a > >> better > >> > > > chance > >> > > > > > of > >> > > > > > > getting higher IOPS on a storage pool that could provide the > >> > > > necessary > >> > > > > > > IOPS. A big downside here is that you want to watch how many > >> > > > CloudStack > >> > > > > > > volumes get deployed on this primary storage because you'll > >> need > >> > to > >> > > > > > > essentially over-provision IOPS in this primary storage to > >> > increase > >> > > > the > >> > > > > > > probability that each and every CloudStack volume that uses > >> this > >> > > > > primary > >> > > > > > > storage gets the necessary IOPS (and isn't as likely to > suffer > >> > from > >> > > > the > >> > > > > > > Noisy Neighbor Effect). You should be able to tell > CloudStack > >> to > >> > > only > >> > > > > > use, > >> > > > > > > say, 80% (or whatever) of the storage you're providing to it > >> (so > >> > as > >> > > > to > >> > > > > > > increase your effective IOPS per GB ratio). This > >> > over-provisioning > >> > > of > >> > > > > > IOPS > >> > > > > > > to control Noisy Neighbors is avoided in option 1. In that > >> > > situation, > >> > > > > you > >> > > > > > > only provision the IOPS and capacity you actually need. It > is > >> a > >> > > much > >> > > > > more > >> > > > > > > sophisticated approach. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks, > >> > > > > > > Mike > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 11:36 PM, Punith S < > >> > punit...@cloudbyte.com> > >> > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > hi hieu, > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > your problem is the bottle neck we see as a storage > vendors > >> in > >> > > the > >> > > > > > cloud, > >> > > > > > > > meaning all the vms in the cloud have not been guaranteed > >> iops > >> > > from > >> > > > > the > >> > > > > > > > primary storage, because in your case i'm assuming you are > >> > > running > >> > > > > > > 1000vms > >> > > > > > > > on a xen cluster whose all vm's disks are lying on a same > >> > primary > >> > > > nfs > >> > > > > > > > storage mounted to the cluster, > >> > > > > > > > hence you won't get the dedicated iops for each vm since > >> every > >> > vm > >> > > > is > >> > > > > > > > sharing the same storage. to solve this issue in > cloudstack > >> we > >> > > the > >> > > > > > third > >> > > > > > > > party vendors have implemented the plugin(namely > cloudbyte , > >> > > > > solidfire > >> > > > > > > etc) > >> > > > > > > > to support managed storage(dedicated volumes with > guaranteed > >> > qos > >> > > > for > >> > > > > > each > >> > > > > > > > vms) , where we are mapping each root disk(vdi) or data > disk > >> > of a > >> > > > vm > >> > > > > > with > >> > > > > > > > one nfs or iscsi share coming out of a pool, also we are > >> > > proposing > >> > > > > the > >> > > > > > > new > >> > > > > > > > feature to change volume iops on fly in 4.5, where you can > >> > > increase > >> > > > > or > >> > > > > > > > decrease your root disk iops while booting or at peak > times. > >> > but > >> > > to > >> > > > > use > >> > > > > > > > this plugin you have to buy our storage solution. > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > if not , you can try creating a nfs share out of ssd pool > >> > storage > >> > > > and > >> > > > > > > > create a primary storage in cloudstack out of it named as > >> > golden > >> > > > > > primary > >> > > > > > > > storage with specific tag like gold, and create a compute > >> > > offering > >> > > > > for > >> > > > > > > your > >> > > > > > > > template with the storage tag as gold, hence all the vm's > >> you > >> > > > create > >> > > > > > will > >> > > > > > > > sit on this gold primary storage with high iops. and other > >> data > >> > > > disks > >> > > > > > on > >> > > > > > > > other primary storage but still here you cannot guarantee > >> the > >> > qos > >> > > > at > >> > > > > vm > >> > > > > > > > level. > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > thanks > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Hieu LE < > >> hieul...@gmail.com> > >> > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> Hi all, > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> There are some problems while deploying a large amount of > >> VMs > >> > in > >> > > > my > >> > > > > > > >> company > >> > > > > > > >> with CloudStack. All VMs are deployed from same template > >> (e.g: > >> > > > > Windows > >> > > > > > > 7) > >> > > > > > > >> and the quantity is approximately ~1000VMs. The problems > >> here > >> > is > >> > > > low > >> > > > > > > IOPS, > >> > > > > > > >> low performance of VM (about ~10-11 IOPS, boot time is > very > >> > > high). > >> > > > > The > >> > > > > > > >> storage of my company is SAN/NAS with NFS and Xen Server > >> > 6.2.0. > >> > > > All > >> > > > > > Xen > >> > > > > > > >> Server nodes have standard server HDD disk raid. > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> I have found some solutions for this such as: > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> - Enable Xen Server Intellicache and some tweaks in > >> > > CloudStack > >> > > > > > codes > >> > > > > > > to > >> > > > > > > >> deploy and start VM in Intellicache mode. But this > >> solution > >> > > > will > >> > > > > > > >> transfer > >> > > > > > > >> all IOPS from shared storage to all local storage, > hence > >> > > affect > >> > > > > and > >> > > > > > > >> limit > >> > > > > > > >> some CloudStack features. > >> > > > > > > >> - Buying some expensive storage solutions and network > to > >> > > > increase > >> > > > > > > IOPS. > >> > > > > > > >> Nah.. > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> So, I am thinking about a new feature that (may be) > >> increasing > >> > > > IOPS > >> > > > > > and > >> > > > > > > >> performance of VMs: > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> 1. Separate golden image in high IOPS partition: > buying > >> new > >> > > > SSD, > >> > > > > > plug > >> > > > > > > >> in > >> > > > > > > >> Xen Server and deployed a new VM in NFS storage WITH > >> golden > >> > > > image > >> > > > > > in > >> > > > > > > >> this > >> > > > > > > >> new SSD partition. This can reduce READ IOPS in shared > >> > > storage > >> > > > > and > >> > > > > > > >> decrease > >> > > > > > > >> boot time of VM. (Currenty, VM deployed in Xen Server > >> > always > >> > > > > have a > >> > > > > > > >> master > >> > > > > > > >> image (golden image - in VMWare) always in the same > >> storage > >> > > > > > > repository > >> > > > > > > >> with > >> > > > > > > >> different image (child image)). We can do this trick > by > >> > > > tweaking > >> > > > > in > >> > > > > > > VHD > >> > > > > > > >> header file with new Xen Server plug-in. > >> > > > > > > >> 2. Create golden primary storage and VM template that > >> > enable > >> > > > this > >> > > > > > > >> feature. > >> > > > > > > >> 3. So, all VMs deployed from template that had enabled > >> this > >> > > > > feature > >> > > > > > > >> will > >> > > > > > > >> have a golden image stored in golden primary storage > >> (SSD > >> > or > >> > > > some > >> > > > > > > high > >> > > > > > > >> IOPS > >> > > > > > > >> partition), and different image (child image) stored > in > >> > other > >> > > > > > normal > >> > > > > > > >> primary storage. > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> This new feature will not transfer all IOPS from shared > >> > storage > >> > > to > >> > > > > > local > >> > > > > > > >> storage (because high IOPS partition can be another high > >> IOPS > >> > > > shared > >> > > > > > > >> storage) and require less money than buying new storage > >> > > solution. > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> What do you think ? If possible, may I write a proposal > in > >> > > > > CloudStack > >> > > > > > > >> wiki ? > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> BRs. > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> Hieu Lee > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > >> -- > >> > > > > > > >> -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- > >> > > > > > > >> Version: 3.1 > >> > > > > > > >> GCS/CM/IT/M/MU d-@? s+(++):+(++) !a C++++(++++)$ > >> > ULC++++(++)$ P > >> > > > > > > >> L++(+++)$ E > >> > > > > > > >> !W N* o+ K w O- M V- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+ t 5 X R tv+ > >> b+(++)>+++ > >> > DI- > >> > > > D+ > >> > > > > G > >> > > > > > > >> e++(+++) h-- r(++)>+++ y- > >> > > > > > > >> ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > -- > >> > > > > > > > regards, > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > punith s > >> > > > > > > > cloudbyte.com > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- > >> > > > > > > *Mike Tutkowski* > >> > > > > > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* > >> > > > > > > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com > >> > > > > > > o: 303.746.7302 > >> > > > > > > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud > >> > > > > > > <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™* > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > -- > >> > > > > > -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- > >> > > > > > Version: 3.1 > >> > > > > > GCS/CM/IT/M/MU d-@? s+(++):+(++) !a C++++(++++)$ > ULC++++(++)$ P > >> > > > > L++(+++)$ > >> > > > > > E > >> > > > > > !W N* o+ K w O- M V- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+ t 5 X R tv+ b+(++)>+++ > DI- > >> > D+ G > >> > > > > > e++(+++) h-- r(++)>+++ y- > >> > > > > > ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > -- > >> > > > > *Mike Tutkowski* > >> > > > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* > >> > > > > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com > >> > > > > o: 303.746.7302 > >> > > > > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud > >> > > > > <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™* > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- > >> > > > Version: 3.1 > >> > > > GCS/CM/IT/M/MU d-@? s+(++):+(++) !a C++++(++++)$ ULC++++(++)$ P > >> > > L++(+++)$ > >> > > > E > >> > > > !W N* o+ K w O- M V- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+ t 5 X R tv+ b+(++)>+++ DI- > D+ > >> G > >> > > > e++(+++) h-- r(++)>+++ y- > >> > > > ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > -- > >> > > *Mike Tutkowski* > >> > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* > >> > > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com > >> > > o: 303.746.7302 > >> > > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud > >> > > <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™* > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- > >> > Version: 3.1 > >> > GCS/CM/IT/M/MU d-@? s+(++):+(++) !a C++++(++++)$ ULC++++(++)$ P > >> L++(+++)$ > >> > E > >> > !W N* o+ K w O- M V- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+ t 5 X R tv+ b+(++)>+++ DI- D+ G > >> > e++(+++) h-- r(++)>+++ y- > >> > ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> *Mike Tutkowski* > >> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* > >> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com > >> o: 303.746.7302 > >> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud > >> <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™* > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- > > Version: 3.1 > > GCS/CM/IT/M/MU d-@? s+(++):+(++) !a C++++(++++)$ ULC++++(++)$ P > L++(+++)$ > > E !W N* o+ K w O- M V- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+ t 5 X R tv+ b+(++)>+++ DI- D+ G > > e++(+++) h-- r(++)>+++ y- > > ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ > > > -- *Mike Tutkowski* *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com o: 303.746.7302 Advancing the way the world uses the cloud <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*
