I think that mainly it’s
a configuration issue (and the fact that VMware and Netapp did a poor job
disimenating their information when they found the locking problem, I think the
TR was changed 4-5 times in a few months and the old settings are DANGEROUS).
We run a reasonably heavy load on our 3070A (250 VMs over NFS+ FC connected
800mbs Oracle DB + 2000 people’s shares via CIFS and several CAD DBs via
NFS). We had some instability but after applying the settings in the latest
version of the TR it’s been extremely stable.
Why would you want to
use VCB in an NFS environment? Storage vMotion works fine for us, although
flexclone would be nice (SIS takes care of the space side but there are
obviously other advantages).
Jeremy
M. Page____________________
Systems Architect
From: Milazzo Giacomo
[mailto:G.Milazzo@sinergy.it]
Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 3:30
AM
To: Page, Jeremy; Paul McGuinness
Cc: toasters@mathworks.com
Subject: Againt on VMware on NFS
-> append to R: NetApp3140 v EMC CX4-240
Just a doubt about VMware on NFS stability.
NFS strage by default have NFS locks enabled: this permits best
protection and avoids more than one access at time on a vmdk file.
During a vMotion, a backup or a snapshot (VMware one), with NFS locks
enabled, the ESX o.s. creates some freeze extended in time, sometimes also
dozens of seconds. These limits have been improved with ESX 3.5U3 but not
completely solved.
To avoid these strange problems we need to disable NFS locks. But in
this case the issue (I’ve already experienced it a couple of time) is
that if VMware cluster fails or malfunctions while it’s in maintenance
mode there’s the risk that the VM will run on two different hosts at the
same time: the result is a BSOD on that VM and that VM file system (vmdk) will
be definitively corrupt!!!
Wth NFS is true that we can have good performances, high flexibility
but we can’t use VCB, storage vMotion, linked clone and VDI. There
aren’t SCSI reservations as VMFS has, so it’s less stable.
Regards,
Da:
owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] Per conto di Page, Jeremy
Inviato: luned́ 27 aprile 2009
15.14
A: Paul McGuinness;
toasters@mathworks.com
Oggetto: RE: NetApp3140 v EMC
CX4-240
Running ESX over NFS
is (imo) the way to go. I moved from FC to NFS about 2 years ago (2.5.4) and
have never looked back. Being able to restore crash consistent out of the box
and the extra flexibility of being able to access your VMDK files directly
instead of through VMFS is very nice. We’re currently running 300 VMs on
5 IBM 3850m2s with dual 1 gig connections to our switches and then dual 10g to
the filer itself. Most of my VMs are on SATA with the higher IO boxes on 15k FC
disks. Dedup is also very nice, just realize that the first time you run the
SIS job (the dedup process) it will hammer your disks since it has to look at
every block with data on it.
If you’re hard
set on block based storage then I don’t think the Netapp boxes are worth
it, but I really think NFS is the way to go. Having the extra layer of
abstraction may be a bit less efficient, but the extra flexibility and related
uptime is very much worth it.
Jeremy
M. Page____________________
Systems Architect
* email:Jeremy.Page@gilbarco.com - ( phone: 336.547.5399 - 6 fax: 336.547.5163
- ( cell: 336.601.7274
From:
owner-toasters@mathworks.com [mailto:owner-toasters@mathworks.com] On Behalf Of Paul McGuinness
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2009 5:19
AM
To: toasters@mathworks.com
Subject: NetApp3140 v EMC CX4-240
I am after opinions / Pros and Cons on running a substantial VMware
infrastructure of approximate 200+ VMs using the 2 mentioned storage systems.
Obvious benefits of the NetApp seem to be around the De-Dupe out of the
box. Any other thoughts / experiences would be appreciated
Fibre attached Dell R900s will be running the ESX side of things.
Paul McGuinness
Infrastructure Services Manager
FINEOS Corporation
__________________________________________________________
FINEOS Corporation is the global brand name of FINEOS Corporation
Limited and its affiliated group companies worldwide.
The information contained in this e-mail is confidential, may be
privileged and is intended
only for the use of the recipient named above. If you are not the
intended recipient or a
representative of the intended recipient, you have received this e-mail
in error and must
not copy, use or disclose the contents of this e-mail to anybody else.
If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender
immediately by return
e-mail and permanently delete the copy you received. This e-mail has
been swept for
computer viruses. However, you should carry out your own virus checks.
Registered in
__________________________________________________________
Please
be advised that this email may contain confidential information.
If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy or
re-transmit this email. If you have received this email in error,
please notify us by email by replying to the sender and by telephone
(call us collect at +1 202-828-0850) and delete this message and any
attachments. Thank you in advance for your cooperation and assistance.
In addition, Danaher and its subsidiaries disclaim that the content of
this email constitutes an offer to enter into, or the acceptance of,
any
contract or agreement or any amendment thereto; provided that the
foregoing disclaimer does not invalidate the binding effect of any
digital or other electronic reproduction of a manual signature that is
included in any attachment to this email.