Hi,
Personally not to experienced with running K8s onto of VMs but there are some users here doing just that and tbh, I do not see why that should be an issue for k8s.
I'd go for ceph here, it's very scalable and fault-tolerant and avoids proprietary black box NAS solutions (IMO almost the best feature of it) you may want to read at least the introduction and preconditions in
https://pve.proxmox.com/pve-docs/chapter-pveceph.html to get some feeling about if it fits your use case. Note, I envision currently the hyper-converged use case, i.e., ceph storage and compute nodes on those three nodes, but if budget allows you could have some nodes for mostly compute and some for mostly storage, for example, add two more nodes to make it five totals, cluster it and add in some more disks and make them Ceph monitors, so that hey have a more central role regarding ceph, and in the others use fewer disks and have more CPU and memory left over for your VM compute stuff.
We released a Ceph benchmark paper a few months ago, maybe that is interesting too (in terms of dooable workloads):
https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/proxmox-ve-ceph-benchmark-2020-09-hyper-converged-with-nvme.76516/
With three or even five nodes you'd have the benefit of being still able to add fast extra network cards (minimum 10G, 25G+ would be better) with two or four ports, respectively, and setup a full mesh on them for use of the ceph private network (the latency and bandwidth hungry "backbone network" of ceph) avoiding an extra switch or that the switch in uses needs to handle all that extra traffic which can interfere VM and Cluster communication.
For those ceph would work as charm IMO, and unifying the data into a single storage tech to manage has quite some benefits and reduces extra cogs that can fail from the system.
Databases may be a bit more hungry for IOPS, with ceph cou could also have faster and slower storage pools in the same cluster, where one is assigned faster SSDs and the other is using slower but cheaper HDDs.
Depends a bit on how your setup and its environment will look like (other servers, is there already some routing/FW host), and what your needs are. There's always the option of using a pfSense, either on a baremetal host or in a VM, both has its advantages and disadvantages. If we're mostly talking shielding off traffic the PVE firewall is definitively fine, natively integrated full-fledged SDN management is currently under development, so for that you may need either a some more hands-on approach or some other tooling, if that's a requirement.
Just some things coming to my mind, feel free to ask if anything is unclear or if you have more specific questions.
Thank you for very much for your reply Thomas.
I read about the Ceph and it looks like it's what I'm looking for. I have some questions related to preconditions section.
Facts I've gathered:
There are 3 services; monitor, manager and object storage daemon. A CPU core or thread for each Ceph service is needed, which means 3 Core or 1.5 Core (Since # of threads are double the number of threads) is required for the 3 services on all the nodes in the cluster.
For the memory usage it's mentioned that OSD service uses 1 GiB of memory to handle 1 TiB of data in addition to the 3-5GB adjustable memory usage.
Questions:
- Do we have any information regarding the memory usage of manager and monitor services as well?
- Should I make my requirement calculations based on 3 CPU core or 1.5 CPU core (using threads instead of cores) for the 3 services in total?
- The requirement of "1 GiB of memory to handle 1 TiB" for OSD would only be required for the data in motion right not for the data that's is peacefully sitting in the disks?
- For your points about the networking requirements, we might need to gradually jump from 3 nodes to 10 within 2 years, in this case what kind of networking suggestion you'd have that we can form the infrastructure now so that we can expand on it easily later? I'd assume starting with a separate switch would provide that capability. And for the network cards I'd assume your suggestion of "minimum 10G, 25G+ would be better" would still be valuable with a switch involved?
- From the benchmark report: “
Can I mix various disk types?
It is possible, but the cluster performance will drop to the performance of the slowest disk.”, wouldn’t be a problem is our case where we mix some regular Hdds with SSDs?
About the firewall, the server room is empty at the moment
So there won't be any other servers outside of this cluster we're forming. And our only concern is to secure ourselves from the outside world and according to your reply I understand that PVE firewall would be sufficient for our use case. It's also good to know that we'd have SDN management in the future as well.
Thomas, I couldn't understand how the suggestion of adding 2 separate nodes would work. So, let's assume that I have the following configuration:
3 identical servers for computing: 2 x Intel Xeon Silver 4210 CPU (10 Core, 20 Thread, 2.20 GHz Base, 3.20 GHz Turbo ), 64 GB DDR4 ECC RAM, 2 x600 GB SAS 15K RPM HD.
2 identical servers for Ceph: 1x Intel Xeon Silver 4210 CPU (10 Core, 20 Thread, 2.20 GHz Base, 3.20 GHz Turbo ), 32GB DDR4 ECC RAM, 4x600 GB SAS 15K RPM HD, 8 TB SSD.
In this setup, don't I still have to install Ceph service monitor, manager and object storage daemon into all of the nodes? Is the advantage maybe the reduced traffic required to control redundancy since it'd flow between the dedicated Ceph servers? Don't we have to have 3 identical servers for this setup?
Overall, I'm leaning towards increasing the core and memory size of the cluster based on Ceph requirements.
Self Notes
- To build a hyper-converged Proxmox + Ceph Cluster there should be at least three (preferably) identical servers for the setup.
- Assign a CPU core (or thread) to each Ceph service to provide enough resources for stable and durable Ceph performance.
-
3-5 GiB of memory (adjustable) will be required by OSD service in addition to the suggested
1 GiB of memory for 1 TiB of data.
- Ceph best performs with an even sized and distributed amount of disks per node.
- Avoid RAID as Ceph handles it.
- PVE firewall will have natively integrated full-fledged SDN management in the future.
rice