fuel-dev team mailing list archive

[Roman Alekseenkov <ralekseenkov@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Based on our experience with Ceph, I would say it should be role-based.
Meaning, option #2.

We made a decision to always deploy Ceph monitors on controllers (that
would be an equivalent of option #1) and this decision turned out not to be
the right one. Dmitry can shed more light on this, I think.

Roman


On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 9:44 PM, Mike Scherbakov <mscherbakov@xxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> +David, Nadya
>
> Hi Max,
> as we discussed verbally there is a major concern behind - about placement
> of MongoDB. As I understand right, it is expected that there is a huge disk
> IO consumption in case of larger deployments (let's say >50 nodes).
> If it is the case, then I would agree that we may not want to use shared
> disks for MongoDB and other OpenStack components. I see two options here:
>
>
>    1. Make sure MongoDB uses dedicated disk(s) on the server where it's
>    installed, and it can be part of existing controller role then
>       - Nailgun can make default allocation in a way that MongoDB has
>       dedicated disk by default, if there is more than one disk on the server
>       (which is 100% of real cases, I assume)
>       - *User's experience would be simply to enable Ceilometer
>       installation by clicking on checkbox.* In simple mode, ceilometer +
>       mongo will be installed on controller node. In HA mode, ceilometer + mongo
>       will be installed on all 3 controllers under pacemaker control
>    2. Make sure MongoDB is installed on a separated server
>    - In UI, user will have to:
>          - enable ceilometer checkbox ("Install Ceilometer")
>          - don't forget to add "ceilometer-db" (mongodb) role to one of
>          the unallocated nodes
>             - UI must ensure that this role should not intersect with any
>             other
>             - UI must ensure that this role is assigned to at least one
>             node in the env, if ceilometer checkbox is enabled
>             - UI must ensure that this role is assigned to at least 3
>             different unallocated nodes in case of HA deployment mode, to ensure that
>             we will have Ceilometer HA (we can skip this, but add logic that if we have
>             more than one mongo - we must build cluster)
>
> In terms of simplicity and ease of use, I would vote for option #1, while
> leaving ability to place MongoDB on a separate server via Fuel CLI for
> customized deployments. #1 solves the issue with disk IO by providing
> dedicated disk(s).
>
> > Do we need HA Cluster with non-HA Mongo?
> For consistency over Fuel story, I vote for HA for all OpenStack
> components, if HA mode is chosen. So my opinion is no - we do not need such
> a case.
>
> > Puppet manifest are  finished
> Great! Please pull request them asap - we will need time for reviews. I
> hope we can complete manifests for HA story by the end of the week too.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 5:37 PM, Max Mazur <mmaxur@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Hi!
>>
>>
>> I'd like to add to Fuel the following options:
>>
>> 1. Simple install
>>  - Ceilometer with MongoDB or Ceilometer wit If customer selected Mongo
>> it is necessary to deploy one more node with MongoDB
>> Puppet manifest are  finished
>>
>> 2. HA Mode
>>  - Ceilometer with MongoDB replica set.  In this case we need 3 MongoDB
>> nodes to build HA replica set.
>> Puppet manifests are in progress now
>>
>>
>> Do we need HA Cluster with non-HA Mongo?
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Max Mazur
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
>> Post to     : fuel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Mike Scherbakov
> #mihgen
>
> --
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
> Post to     : fuel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>