[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-users] LVM's inside of Domu's


  • To: Donny Brooks <dbrooks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Edson Marquezani Filho <edsonmarquezani@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 09:04:08 -0300
  • Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Delivery-date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 05:05:40 -0700
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; b=gcHEEJCO3uvxDnWA3SwucS5rjcQO0d0Im4ID3B56pOuuEOy8e+w0JKlLE8lD9AeUVE RSdOrfZpyf3xAW0oLSPFF4d2cRPuKdEMjNNJ3pvm6cQH4Uf0CFv25w3qVWlgZqraOUAU /WOU6atPhOclE37nIzzlQLtbtjsgFLz12X7is=
  • List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>

>
> Possible drawbacks to having LVM in domu:
> cannot mount /dev/foo/lv from dom0 and see filesystem
> possible slowdown?
>
> Looking for any and all feedback on this. Thanks in advance!
>

My (very short, I advise) experience on that topic was bad enough to
make me give up on using LVM over LVM. Yes, I agree that would the
ideal scenario for storage managment, but after running some basic I/O
tests (with IOZone[1]) I found out that performance went to the ground
drastically. Ok, maybe I'm being a litte dramatic here, but I really
had a significant decrease on I/O write and read rates after adding a
second LVM layer on domU. So, I abandoned this idea and kept LVM only
on dom0 side.

That's my particular point of view, but not take it as a rule. You
should perform your own tests and see what you get.

[1] http://www.iozone.org/

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.