You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
While XenServer got it's proprietary GFS2, XCP-ng still lack the option of a thin-provisioned, modern, block storage.
Many storage systems are connected via iSCSI or (probably lest often than iSCSI) Fibre Channel.
The current LVM/VHD-combo currently still lacks of:
2 TB limit
Thin provisioning (effiicient space usage)
Snapshots using TP (effiicient space usage and enabling big VMs to be snapshooted, migrated etc)
Due to performance reasons it was less of a thing with pure HDD storages, as it can easily end up in lots of fragments, but due to a steady increase of hybrid or even full-flash storages, it's barely a point anymore.
Still something to cach up with VMware and (now back) XenServer.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The GFS2 SR from XenServer is not production ready: it's based on SMAPIv3, without support for any migration path from SMAPIv1, no live storage migration, no backup/delta capability and so on.
But we have plans on our side: improving SMAPIv3 and build a driver for a shared block based. Maybe GFS2 is an option, maybe not.
First, getting one SMAPIv3 local driver available (matter of weeks now), then backup capabilities, then a migration path, then shared file based SR (NFS) and finally shared block (the hardest thing). No ETA because depends on previous steps.
I see that this was discussed about 7 months ago. As you know, support for block storage on fibre channel and elimination of 2 TB limits would be a huge deal in supplanting other vendors dominance in the enterprise marketplace. I just wanted to check how things are going in moving towards this feature?
While XenServer got it's proprietary GFS2, XCP-ng still lack the option of a thin-provisioned, modern, block storage.
Many storage systems are connected via iSCSI or (probably lest often than iSCSI) Fibre Channel.
The current LVM/VHD-combo currently still lacks of:
Due to performance reasons it was less of a thing with pure HDD storages, as it can easily end up in lots of fragments, but due to a steady increase of hybrid or even full-flash storages, it's barely a point anymore.
Still something to cach up with VMware and (now back) XenServer.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: