Where Does oVirt Make Sense
-
Here is my procedure to update a single node
put host in global maintenance # hosted-engine --set-maintenance --mode=global run yum update on hosted engine # yum update -y run engine-setup on hosted engine # engine-setup shutdown all VMs and hosted engine run yum update on physical host reboot start hosted-engine disable global maintenance # hosted-engine --set-maintenance --mode=none -
@FATeknollogee so if you have 100 Nodes, and one engine, you have to shut down all 100 Nodes all at the same time just to patch the Engine?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@FATeknollogee so if you have 100 Nodes, and one engine, you have to shut down all 100 Nodes all at the same time just to patch the Engine?
In a multi-node system, the vm's would continue to run while you patch & reboot the hosted engine.
Not sure how your example would work.
-
@FATeknollogee said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@scottalanmiller said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@FATeknollogee so if you have 100 Nodes, and one engine, you have to shut down all 100 Nodes all at the same time just to patch the Engine?
In a multi-node system, the vm's would continue to run while you patch & reboot the hosted engine.
Not sure how your example would work.
Seems hard to believe that it would kill all nodes if the Engine updates then, because how would it work for clusters and not individual nodes? Logically I can't think of any way that that would get connected.
-
If I understood it correctly you can only run 3, 6, 9 or 12 nodes in a hyperconverged cluster.
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_hyperconverged_infrastructure_for_virtualization/1.6/html/deploying_red_hat_hyperconverged_infrastructure_for_virtualization/rhhi-requirements#rhhi-req-pmIt makes it complicated to say the least.
If you use multi-node servers most are also based on even numbers of nodes such as two, four or eight. So if you are going high-density servers to save on rackspace things get complicated.
-
@Pete-S said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
If I understood it correctly you can only run 3, 6, 9 or 12 nodes in a hyperconverged cluster.
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_hyperconverged_infrastructure_for_virtualization/1.6/html/deploying_red_hat_hyperconverged_infrastructure_for_virtualization/rhhi-requirements#rhhi-req-pmIt makes it complicated to say the least.
If you use multi-node servers most are also based on even numbers of nodes such as two, four or eight. So if you are going high-density servers to save on rackspace things get complicated.
That is definitely what it says:
Initial deployments of Red Hat Hyperconverged Infrastructure for Virtualization are either 1 node or 3 nodes.
1 node deployments cannot be scaled.
3 node deployments can be scaled to 6, 9, or 12 nodes using one of the following methods:
Add new hyperconverged nodes to the cluster, in sets of three, up to the maximum of 12 hyperconverged nodes.
Create new Gluster volumes using new disks on new or existing nodes.
Expand existing Gluster volumes to span 6, 9, or 12 nodes using new disks on new or existing nodes. -
@scottalanmiller said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@FATeknollogee said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@scottalanmiller said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@FATeknollogee said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@scottalanmiller said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
Sandro Bonazzola reached out to me to add a major correction to the list... oVirt supports a single node deployment mode. Getting more information on that now.
I told you about single node deployment in the other thread!
https://mangolassi.it/post/468419Hmm... not at the point in the thread where that goes to. Will have to dig around for it. What's the storage situation when you do that?
It's local storage on the host since its a single node!
So with a single node deployment, you can have many single node deployments, all with local storage, all managed by a single oVirt? That's very, very contrary to what someone was promoting in the other thread.
This is how I deployed it in testing.
-
Found my old thread...
-
@Obsolesce said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@scottalanmiller said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@FATeknollogee said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@scottalanmiller said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@FATeknollogee said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@scottalanmiller said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
Sandro Bonazzola reached out to me to add a major correction to the list... oVirt supports a single node deployment mode. Getting more information on that now.
I told you about single node deployment in the other thread!
https://mangolassi.it/post/468419Hmm... not at the point in the thread where that goes to. Will have to dig around for it. What's the storage situation when you do that?
It's local storage on the host since its a single node!
So with a single node deployment, you can have many single node deployments, all with local storage, all managed by a single oVirt? That's very, very contrary to what someone was promoting in the other thread.
This is how I deployed it in testing.
According to oVirt, whom I asked directly, even for this you need shared storage.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@Obsolesce said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@scottalanmiller said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@FATeknollogee said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@scottalanmiller said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@FATeknollogee said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@scottalanmiller said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
Sandro Bonazzola reached out to me to add a major correction to the list... oVirt supports a single node deployment mode. Getting more information on that now.
I told you about single node deployment in the other thread!
https://mangolassi.it/post/468419Hmm... not at the point in the thread where that goes to. Will have to dig around for it. What's the storage situation when you do that?
It's local storage on the host since its a single node!
So with a single node deployment, you can have many single node deployments, all with local storage, all managed by a single oVirt? That's very, very contrary to what someone was promoting in the other thread.
This is how I deployed it in testing.
According to oVirt, whom I asked directly, even for this you need shared storage.
In what context? I obviously did not use it when I had oVirt running and working.
-
@Obsolesce said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@scottalanmiller said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@Obsolesce said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@scottalanmiller said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@FATeknollogee said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@scottalanmiller said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@FATeknollogee said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
@scottalanmiller said in Where Does oVirt Make Sense:
Sandro Bonazzola reached out to me to add a major correction to the list... oVirt supports a single node deployment mode. Getting more information on that now.
I told you about single node deployment in the other thread!
https://mangolassi.it/post/468419Hmm... not at the point in the thread where that goes to. Will have to dig around for it. What's the storage situation when you do that?
It's local storage on the host since its a single node!
So with a single node deployment, you can have many single node deployments, all with local storage, all managed by a single oVirt? That's very, very contrary to what someone was promoting in the other thread.
This is how I deployed it in testing.
According to oVirt, whom I asked directly, even for this you need shared storage.
In what context? I obviously did not use it when I had oVirt running and working.
In the context of "what is supported." They said later that there are tricks to getting it to work, but it is officially unsupported.
-
1 .So can ovirt be run with only 2 nodes?
2. With those 2 nodes, do you need a separate shared storage device for live migrations, etc, or can you have local storage (Like "vsan")?
