The 27/06/12, Brian Candler wrote: > I've made a test setup like this, but unfortunately I haven't yet been able > to get half-decent performance out of glusterfs 3.3 as a KVM backend. It > may work better if you use local disk for the VM images, and within the VM > mount the glusterfs volume for application data. Ok. > Alternatively, look at something like ganeti (which by default runs on top > of drbd+LVM, although you can also use it to manage a cluster which uses a > shared file store backend like gluster) Didn't know about ganeti. We'll take a look. > Maybe 3.3.1 will be better. But today, your investment in SSDs is quite > likely to be wasted :-( Hope it won't be wasted. To avoid that, all you feedbacks are very interesting! > You'd also need some mechanism for starting each VM on node B if node A > fails. You can probably script that, although there are lots of hazards for > the unwary. Maybe better to have the failover done manually. Ok. -- Nicolas Sebrecht
