Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
Hi, On 08/05/2011 11:44 AM, Mark wrote: > I'm inserting the DRBD layer for on-demand VM migration purposes. Data > redundancy is by default done using local soft or hardware raid only, it > is not a failover or a network raid scenario. DRBD is only used to > minimize downtime while migrating the VM to another host which is not > known beforehand. Hmm. So you will accept a full sync before the migration takes place? Seems wasteful, and I'm not sure you save all that much by running StandAlone. > I could possibly do that by using the dm layer to put the DRBD under the > VM when needed, but the disabled AL would be simpler and probably less > error-prone. >> Have you compared Standalone DRBD performance with performance when not >> > using DRBD at all? > well, I tested disabled AL against active AL. It's 100 random buffered > write ops against 40 per second. And yes, some work loads here are pretty > much like that. :-/ You can disable the AL? News to me, but sounds good in your scenario. If this works, why don't you go AL-less? Seeing as you don't want to use a peer, there is nothing DRBD could do with its hot extents if it tried. HTH, Felix