XCP-ng
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Question about pools

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved XCP-ng
    5 Posts 3 Posters 22 Views 3 Watching
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • V Offline
      vlamincktr
      last edited by vlamincktr

      So we have 2 hosts(no shared storage) currently in a pool, am I correct in thinking our backup jobs would be able to run faster if each host was it's own pool/master? I was told the backups always run via the pool master meaning when I am pulling backups from each box it's limited by the master where if both hosts were in their own pool backups could run from both at the same time.

      Are there any other downsides to having each host in it's own pool? It seems like most of the pool features are more for setups with shared storage where you can migrate vm's by moving the memory instead of the storage, I never do rolling pool updates currently because it would take days to migrate our vm's between the two hosts as each host has it's own physical storage containing vm's.

      Just looking for some thoughts to make sure I'm not causing myself more trouble or missing some critical info before I change anything.

      Both hosts are running Sata SSD storage with 10G links(dedicated management as well as separate link for vm traffic), backup server is just running sas hdd's so not lightning fast but also has a 10g link.

      Hosts are managed via XOA.

      P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • P Offline
        Pilow @vlamincktr
        last edited by Pilow

        @vlamincktr said:

        Hosts are managed via XOA.

        and so is the backup.

        while backups are running, monitor your bandwidths, you will see that backup flow through XOA.
        So having the two hosts in their own pool will get you no gain in term of backup performance I guess...
        You have the advantage of facilitated network configuration with the two hosts in the same pool as network is pushed from pool config. I could see that as a downside when separating the two hosts.

        P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • P Offline
          Pilow @Pilow
          last edited by

          one way to double backup performance would be to put a XO PROXY on the host where XOA is not.
          you could then dedicate some jobs/vms through this XO PROXY, running at the same time as backups running through XOA.

          the hosts would still be in one Pool, but flow of backups would egress simultaneously from XOA and XO PROXY from the two hosts.

          V 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • V Offline
            vlamincktr @Pilow
            last edited by

            @Pilow That sounds like it would give the desired results without any pool changes, I'll look into that setup, thanks!

            acebmxerA 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • acebmxerA Online
              acebmxer @vlamincktr
              last edited by acebmxer

              @vlamincktr

              Just an fyi there is a cost and licensing behind proxy support.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0

              Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.

              Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.

              With your input, this post could be even better 💗

              Register Login
              • First post
                Last post