XenServer NFS Storage Repo in the SMB
-
@DustinB3403 said:
@Dashrender said:
why aren't you looking at local storage for the VM's and external storage for the backups?
The trouble with local storage is the amount of space XO takes to create backups, which get stored locally on the XenServer host(s).
How is that an issue? Local storage doesn't use some extra space that remote does not.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@johnhooks said:
@Dashrender said:
why aren't you looking at local storage for the VM's and external storage for the backups?
That's kind of where this came from. If you do the delta backups in XO it keeps a snapshot of the disk on the storage repository. So if you have limited space and your SR is local, you might not have enough room for all of the disk snapshots.
If you have limited space and your SR is remote, how does that improve things?
The question isn't if you have limited space with remote SR.
The question is "what is reasonable for local storage and when should "I" be looking into remote storage?"
-
@DustinB3403 said:
If you have limited space and your SR is remote, how does that improve things?
The question isn't if you have limited space with remote SR.
But if you are designing a system and design it with the same amount of storage, you would have the same design decision in either location. If the question is about "what if someone doesn't plan for enough storage" then the answer is "plan for more".
-
@DustinB3403 said:
The question is "what is reasonable for local storage and when should "I" be looking into remote storage?"
http://www.smbitjournal.com/2013/06/when-to-consider-a-san/
Logic applies to all external storage. You only consider external when the physical scale in number of VM hosts gets so large that having the storage external makes it cheaper than having it local and the cost savings is a worthwhile trade off versus the increase in risk and effort.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@DustinB3403 said:
If you have limited space and your SR is remote, how does that improve things?
The question isn't if you have limited space with remote SR.
But if you are designing a system and design it with the same amount of storage, you would have the same design decision in either location. If the question is about "what if someone doesn't plan for enough storage" then the answer is "plan for more".
"Plan for more...."
Well that sure is a simple answer.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@DustinB3403 said:
If you have limited space and your SR is remote, how does that improve things?
The question isn't if you have limited space with remote SR.
But if you are designing a system and design it with the same amount of storage, you would have the same design decision in either location. If the question is about "what if someone doesn't plan for enough storage" then the answer is "plan for more".
Isn't this a quote from you?
Always implement things when you actually need them, never when you just foresee that you need them
-
@DustinB3403 said:
"Plan for more...."
Well that sure is a simple answer.
It's a pretty simple question when boil it down to what is really being asked. The question is "what to do when we don't plan for enough storage." It's not about local or remote at all, just about not having enough of it. Get more.
In both cases the things that would make the problem would make it in both places.
-
@johnhooks said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@DustinB3403 said:
If you have limited space and your SR is remote, how does that improve things?
The question isn't if you have limited space with remote SR.
But if you are designing a system and design it with the same amount of storage, you would have the same design decision in either location. If the question is about "what if someone doesn't plan for enough storage" then the answer is "plan for more".
Isn't this a quote from you?
Always implement things when you actually need them, never when you just foresee that you need them
Sure, but don't do it remotely. Implement it in the right place.
-
So then the nagging follow up question is; How do you calculate enough storage space for your Delta backups on your local storage array?
-
@DustinB3403 said:
So then the nagging follow up question is; How do you calculate enough storage space for your Delta backups on your local storage array?
A quick answer I guess would be enough to hold two of the VHDs for each VM. But that doesn't take into account whether they are thin provisioned or anything else.
However, only enough for 2 would exclude the ability for additional manual snapshots if you want to take some (assuming you're going to use all of that).
-
@johnhooks Well we know that XO with Local Storage is a thick provision delta, @olivier answered that himself.
-
@DustinB3403 Local Storage in LVM. Not file based.
-
@DustinB3403 said:
@johnhooks Well we know that XO with Local Storage is a thick provision delta, @olivier answered that himself.
No, only under certain circumstances that break other best practices. Like with most of these kinds of things, it turns into one broken best practice leading to another leading to disaster.
-
@DustinB3403 said:
@johnhooks Well we know that XO with Local Storage is a thick provision delta, @olivier answered that himself.
mine by default are thin I believe. Im def not using all of what is provisioned there.
-
Our local was thin too.
-
@DustinB3403 said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@DustinB3403 said:
If you have limited space and your SR is remote, how does that improve things?
The question isn't if you have limited space with remote SR.
But if you are designing a system and design it with the same amount of storage, you would have the same design decision in either location. If the question is about "what if someone doesn't plan for enough storage" then the answer is "plan for more".
"Plan for more...."
Well that sure is a simple answer.
LOL - yeah that is kinda a non answer.
I take you the question to be, we planned for 8 TB with backups fitting in an additional 3 TB, 3 months later we found out that was to small. At the point I'd say you have a new project, which is a growth project, and you work it from that angle.
-
@DustinB3403 said:
So then the nagging follow up question is; How do you calculate enough storage space for your Delta backups on your local storage array?
Look at your current backups, see what the deltas are.
If you don't have previous backups, or your previous backups are full disk backups, I think the VMWare tools have the ability to run and collect that kind of data - I can only guess there are other tools out there that can do the same.
-
@Dashrender said:
Well that sure is a simple answer.
LOL - yeah that is kinda a non answer.
Not really. What's the other option? If you don't have enough of something that you need, the answer is always "get more" and/or "find a way to need less." It's really the answer. The question is so simple that it makes the answer seem absurd. But when you look at what the question really is and remove the red herrings, that's all that was asked.
-
@Dashrender said:
I take you the question to be, we planned for 8 TB with backups fitting in an additional 3 TB, 3 months later we found out that was to small. At the point I'd say you have a new project, which is a growth project, and you work it from that angle.
And regardless of what that project is, it's goal will be to "add more storage."
-
@Dashrender said:
@DustinB3403 said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@DustinB3403 said:
If you have limited space and your SR is remote, how does that improve things?
The question isn't if you have limited space with remote SR.
But if you are designing a system and design it with the same amount of storage, you would have the same design decision in either location. If the question is about "what if someone doesn't plan for enough storage" then the answer is "plan for more".
"Plan for more...."
Well that sure is a simple answer.
LOL - yeah that is kinda a non answer.
I take you the question to be, we planned for 8 TB with backups fitting in an additional 3 TB, 3 months later we found out that was to small. At the point I'd say you have a new project, which is a growth project, and you work it from that angle.
Actually no, 8TB today with room for 3TB of growth was the plan for a total of 11TB.
So instead of 11TB you'd want to have 20TB or more local.
