[gpfsug-discuss] GPFS for DBs..MySQL, PGSQL, etc; How about VMware?
Christoph Krafft
ckrafft at de.ibm.com
Fri Sep 4 07:53:51 BST 2015
Hi Zach,
VMware is covered via Pass-through Raw Device Mapping (RDM) with physical
compatibility mode if you want direct disk access inside the VM.
Otherwise works as a "normal" GPFS client
Go to: "Table 28. VMware support matrix" @
http://www-01.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/STXKQY/gpfsclustersfaq.html
Have a client using this in production with x86 RHEL running on top of
VMware ... it works well. They use RDM since the VMs do have disk access
directly.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Sincerely
Christoph Krafft
Client Technical Specialist - Power Systems, IBM Systems
Certified IT Specialist @ The Open Group
Phone: +49 (0) 7034 643 2171 IBM Deutschland GmbH
Mobile: +49 (0) 160 97 81 86 12 Hechtsheimer Str. 2
Email: ckrafft at de.ibm.com 55131 Mainz
Germany
IBM Deutschland
GmbH /
Vorsitzender des
Aufsichtsrats:
Martin Jetter
Geschäftsführung:
Martina Koederitz
(Vorsitzende),
Susanne Peter,
Norbert Janzen,
Dr. Christian
Keller, Ivo
Koerner, Markus
Koerner
Sitz der
Gesellschaft:
Ehningen /
Registergericht:
Amtsgericht
Stuttgart, HRB
14562 /
WEEE-Reg.-Nr. DE
99369940
From: Zachary Giles <zgiles at gmail.com>
To: gpfsug main discussion list <gpfsug-discuss at gpfsug.org>
Date: 03.09.2015 16:59
Subject: [gpfsug-discuss] GPFS for DBs..MySQL, PGSQL, etc; How about
VMware?
Sent by: gpfsug-discuss-bounces at gpfsug.org
Hello Everyone,
Medium-time user of GPFS, MySQL, PostgreSQL, etc here.. Decent sized
system in production, hundreds of nodes, lots of tuning etc. Not a
newb. :)
Looking for opinions on running database engines backed by GPFS.
Has anyone run any backed by GPFS and what did you think about it?
I realize there are tuning guides and guide-lines for running
different DBs on different file systems, but there seems to be a lack
of best-practices for doing so on GPFS.
For example, usually you don't run DBs backed by NFS due to locking,
cacheing etc.. You can tune those out with sync, hard, etc, but, still
the best practice is to use a local file system.
As GPFS is hybrid, and used for many apps that do have hard
requirements such as Cinder block storage, science apps, etc, and has
proper byte-level locking.. it seems like it would be semi-equal to a
lock file system.
Does anyone have any opinions, experiences, or recommendations for
running DBs backed by GPFS?
Also will accept horror stories, gotcha's, and "dont do it's". :)
On that same note...
How about VMware?
Obviously I guess really the only way would be via NFS export.. which
cNFS was .. not the best at (my opinion). Maybe Protocol Servers are
better? Maybe also a "don't do it"?
Thanks,
-Zach
--
Zach Giles
zgiles at gmail.com
_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at gpfsug.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss_gpfsug.org/attachments/20150904/76a9660c/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ecblank.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 45 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss_gpfsug.org/attachments/20150904/76a9660c/attachment.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0D771085.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1851 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss_gpfsug.org/attachments/20150904/76a9660c/attachment-0001.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: graycol.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 105 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss_gpfsug.org/attachments/20150904/76a9660c/attachment-0002.gif>
More information about the gpfsug-discuss
mailing list