Local storage gives the simplest design and the most predictable behavior. The live migration is often overrated while host crashes are pretty rare. We have servers with 500+ days of operation running Cloudstack. So... it's just fine, at least with KVM.
вт, 21 дек. 2021 г., 17:37 Gabriel Bräscher <[email protected]>: > Hi Yordan, > > HA is definitely the biggest con, as Rohit mentioned. > Adding to that, live migrating VMs around the cluster takes a LOT more time > as well. For example, it takes "5 minutes" when live migrating VMs in > shared storages; however, it can take hours when live migrating from local > storages, depending on the VMs root disk size. > It is important to consider the time needed for each VM migration, in case > you need to offload a host for maintenance or balance the VMs workload > across the cluster. > > Regards, > Gabriel. > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 11:12 AM Rohit Yadav <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi Yordan, > > > > The biggest cons of using local storage is probably that you'll lose > > high-availability, if the host goes down so does the storage. > > > > > > Regards. > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Yordan Kostov <[email protected]> > > Sent: Friday, December 17, 2021 16:17 > > To: [email protected] <[email protected]> > > Subject: ACS with local disks > > > > Hey everyone, > > > > I am exploring a design based on ACS + XCP-NG with nodes > > that have local disks. Roughly around 50 nodes. > > In this case local storage is just local - no SDS > > solutions whatsoever. > > Are there any cons that I should have in mind? > > > > Best regards, > > Jordan > > > > > > > > > > >
