ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Xenserver and Storage

    IT Discussion
    14
    145
    17.3k
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • scottalanmillerS
      scottalanmiller @jrc
      last edited by

      @jrc said in Xenserver and Storage:

      What is the general cost for Starwind's VSAN stuff? Is it a perpetual licence or a per year thing?

      They have totally free versions.

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • DustinB3403D
        DustinB3403 @jrc
        last edited by

        @jrc said in Xenserver and Storage:

        Can someone give me an overview what a VSAN setup would physically and software wise look like. Sounds like there is a controller involved, would this run on the host? Both hosts? Stand alone hardware?

        What is the general cost for Starwind's VSAN stuff? Is it a perpetual licence or a per year thing?

        Paging @KOOLER

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • scottalanmillerS
          scottalanmiller @jrc
          last edited by

          @jrc said in Xenserver and Storage:

          Can someone give me an overview what a VSAN setup would physically and software wise look like. Sounds like there is a controller involved, would this run on the host? Both hosts? Stand alone hardware?

          It's SAN run on the hosts. VSAN just standard for Virtual SAN. It's really SAN, but it doesn't have any appliance associated with it, so you don't take on all of the risks of external storage, because it is stored on the hypervisor.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
          • DustinB3403D
            DustinB3403
            last edited by

            @jrc you'd have a VM on each host, running the VSAN software. They'd pool the resources from all of your servers.

            Only your hypervisors would be the things needed. No dedicated cabling between the systems, no custom switches, no external storage.

            Everything is hyperconverged between your available servers.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
            • scottalanmillerS
              scottalanmiller
              last edited by

              If you put VSAN on stand alone hardware, it turns back into normal SAN.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • jrcJ
                jrc
                last edited by

                So you have a VM on each host, and you give it all the local storage. It then allows you to connect the host to it via some protocol (iSCSI, NAS etc)? Or does the VM has some sort of extra hook into the OS to manage and share the storage?

                Does it basically just keep the storage volumes on each host synced and identical?

                What kind of overhead does this create (ie if I have 6Tb in each server, does that mean I actually only have 3Tb of usable space since I need 2 copies of everything, 1 for each server)?

                Is there a need for a dedicated link between hosts for sync traffic?

                Starwind's stuff is free, which is cool. Is the paid version particularly expensive? I am thinking support would be a good idea, if only for a year.

                This just sounds too easy and/or good to be true. As it sounds like I just need to add drives to my 2 hosts and setup some free software and I'd be set. So I am just making sure I know about as many of the considerations as possible before I run this up the flag pole for a budget.

                scottalanmillerS 6 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • scottalanmillerS
                  scottalanmiller @jrc
                  last edited by

                  @jrc said in Xenserver and Storage:

                  So you have a VM on each host, and you give it all the local storage. It then allows you to connect the host to it via some protocol (iSCSI, NAS etc)?

                  It is VSAN if it uses iSCSI. It is VNAS if it uses NFS or SMB.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • scottalanmillerS
                    scottalanmiller @jrc
                    last edited by

                    @jrc said in Xenserver and Storage:

                    Or does the VM has some sort of extra hook into the OS to manage and share the storage?

                    That would not be VSAN then. It's really SAN. Not something randomly being called SAN. It's just a SAN that isn't on its own hardware.

                    jrcJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • scottalanmillerS
                      scottalanmiller @jrc
                      last edited by

                      @jrc said in Xenserver and Storage:

                      Is there a need for a dedicated link between hosts for sync traffic?

                      Yes, just like with normal SAN.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • scottalanmillerS
                        scottalanmiller @jrc
                        last edited by

                        @jrc said in Xenserver and Storage:

                        Starwind's stuff is free, which is cool. Is the paid version particularly expensive? I am thinking support would be a good idea, if only for a year.

                        Not too bad. Way less than something like VMware's VSAN.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                        • jrcJ
                          jrc @scottalanmiller
                          last edited by

                          @scottalanmiller said in Xenserver and Storage:

                          @jrc said in Xenserver and Storage:

                          Or does the VM has some sort of extra hook into the OS to manage and share the storage?

                          That would not be VSAN then. It's really SAN. Not something randomly being called SAN. It's just a SAN that isn't on its own hardware.

                          So the appliance then makes use of the virtual hard drives you assign to it for the storage your host then uses? How do you get past the 2Tb limit in this then??

                          scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • scottalanmillerS
                            scottalanmiller @jrc
                            last edited by

                            @jrc said in Xenserver and Storage:

                            This just sounds too easy and/or good to be true. As it sounds like I just need to add drives to my 2 hosts and setup some free software and I'd be set. So I am just making sure I know about as many of the considerations as possible before I run this up the flag pole for a budget.

                            Don't think of it that way. This is exactly what we've been preaching for forever. When we say "no one needs a SAN", this stuff is why and long has been. This is just one of the ways to have RLS... you can see when I was writing about RLS:

                            http://www.smbitjournal.com/2013/07/replicated-local-storage/

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                            • scottalanmillerS
                              scottalanmiller @jrc
                              last edited by

                              @jrc said in Xenserver and Storage:

                              @scottalanmiller said in Xenserver and Storage:

                              @jrc said in Xenserver and Storage:

                              Or does the VM has some sort of extra hook into the OS to manage and share the storage?

                              That would not be VSAN then. It's really SAN. Not something randomly being called SAN. It's just a SAN that isn't on its own hardware.

                              So the appliance then makes use of the virtual hard drives you assign to it for the storage your host then uses? How do you get past the 2Tb limit in this then??

                              You don't. Anything on top of Xen is going to have that limit.

                              jrcJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • jrcJ
                                jrc @scottalanmiller
                                last edited by

                                @scottalanmiller said in Xenserver and Storage:

                                @jrc said in Xenserver and Storage:

                                @scottalanmiller said in Xenserver and Storage:

                                @jrc said in Xenserver and Storage:

                                Or does the VM has some sort of extra hook into the OS to manage and share the storage?

                                That would not be VSAN then. It's really SAN. Not something randomly being called SAN. It's just a SAN that isn't on its own hardware.

                                So the appliance then makes use of the virtual hard drives you assign to it for the storage your host then uses? How do you get past the 2Tb limit in this then??

                                You don't. Anything on top of Xen is going to have that limit.

                                Then how on earth does that solution scale like they say it does? That means you have a limit of ~32Tb of attached storage (Xen's 16* attached VHD limit and 2Tb per VHD limit). How does the virtual appliance handle getting beyond that?

                                *I could be remembering the number of attached HDD limit wrong, but I do recall there is one and it is low, but I ran into with Unitrends backups more than once.

                                scottalanmillerS 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • scottalanmillerS
                                  scottalanmiller @jrc
                                  last edited by

                                  @jrc said in Xenserver and Storage:

                                  What kind of overhead does this create (ie if I have 6Tb in each server, does that mean I actually only have 3Tb of usable space since I need 2 copies of everything, 1 for each server)?

                                  It's network RAID 1 in a two node case. You lose 50% of capacity. But you would with a normal SAN, too. Everything is the same as a normal SAN. So if you have 6TB on each of two nodes, you get 6TB usable by the cluster.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • scottalanmillerS
                                    scottalanmiller @jrc
                                    last edited by

                                    @jrc said in Xenserver and Storage:

                                    Then how on earth does that solution scale like they say it does?

                                    Starwind can use as many 2TB chunks as you want on any given node. And it can use as many nodes as Xen supports. Starwind will use everything Xen can throw at it.

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • scottalanmillerS
                                      scottalanmiller @jrc
                                      last edited by

                                      @jrc said in Xenserver and Storage:

                                      Then how on earth does that solution scale like they say it does? That means you have a limit of ~32Tb of attached storage (Xen's 16* attached VHD limit and 2Tb per VHD limit). How does the virtual appliance handle getting beyond that?

                                      You have to work around the 2TB limit in another way, but Starwind will use it regardless of how you get it there. So Starwind definitely does not have that limit. But trying to use Xen's 2TB limit system under it will create limits on the Xen side.

                                      jrcJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • scottalanmillerS
                                        scottalanmiller
                                        last edited by

                                        Remember, we say Xen but these limits are 100% XenServer. If you were on Xen, you'd have none of these limits.

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                        • DustinB3403D
                                          DustinB3403
                                          last edited by

                                          Would spanning the drives within the guest address this issue as far as the guest cares? At 2TB we're discussing file shares and large databases anyways.

                                          Things that simply need storage, continuous or not when "physically" looking at them. Within the guest OS simply address the limit there. . .

                                          scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • jrcJ
                                            jrc @scottalanmiller
                                            last edited by

                                            @scottalanmiller said in Xenserver and Storage:

                                            @jrc said in Xenserver and Storage:

                                            Then how on earth does that solution scale like they say it does? That means you have a limit of ~32Tb of attached storage (Xen's 16* attached VHD limit and 2Tb per VHD limit). How does the virtual appliance handle getting beyond that?

                                            You have to work around the 2TB limit in another way, but Starwind will use it regardless of how you get it there. So Starwind definitely does not have that limit. But trying to use Xen's 2TB limit system under it will create limits on the Xen side.

                                            I'm sorry of this sounds dense, but what??

                                            (And yeah, I realize when We/I say Xen we mean Xenserver and not pure Xen).

                                            scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • 1
                                            • 2
                                            • 3
                                            • 4
                                            • 5
                                            • 6
                                            • 7
                                            • 8
                                            • 2 / 8
                                            • First post
                                              Last post