Request of compatibility narrower between PVE and DRBD!!!

[cesarpk]

First of all I wish to congratulate to the development team PVE, truly excellent and admirable work
I admire the effort that you perform for make of PVE a solid and robust product

About the reason for this post and DRBD:

Background:
1- In the Proxmox forum I have requested the support of his kernel for the latest stable version of DRBD, but unfortunately not gotten any response
2- The current version of DRBD is 4 times faster than its predecessor (the 8.4.3 version), and obviously the more stable, please see this link:
http://blogs.linbit.com/p/469/843-random-writes-faster/
3- Currently DRBD is the best system of storage replication for use with pairs of Nodes and with low consume of processor
4- Its performance is unmatched compared to other storage solutions, and faster if is installed in the PVE
Nodes since his reads of blocks disk are locals (CEPH, GlusterFS, Sheepdog have a long way to go to achieve good performance)
5- LINBIT is a partner with Red Hat. LINBIT has tested and certified their DRBD product to run on Red Hat Enterprise Linux(RHEL) 5.6+ and RHEL 6. Please see this link:
https://access.redhat.com/site/solutions/32085
6- It is undesirable to have to compile the PVE kernel to enable support the latest stable version of DRBD each time you download a new kernel
7- To this is added to PVE launches new kernels with great regularity
8- If we have multiple hosts with DRBD, you must repeat the same process on each host, which means more complications of time and productivity of Servers
9- I attend to some clients through VPN (eg OpenVPN), this software is installed into a VM with other features such as default gateway, firewall, etc., and as this VM is installed in HA with DRBD, it is impossible compile the new kernel DRBD downloaded and enable it again while this VM is power on

My request to PVE team:
Is possible that the Proxmox kernel always includes support for the latest stable version of DRBD?

Additional important note in my request in favor of our community:
I am sure that if PVE team make a survey about of this support to all community, the whole community will vote in favor, ie that not there will a single vote against

Hoping that this post will not disturb and waiting your answer I say see you soon

Best regards
Cesar

 

[dietmar]

We use the same version as RHEL.

 

[cesarpk]

We use the same version as RHEL.

Thanks dietmar for your answer, but after i have updated my PVE i can see that the version of DRBD supported on the Kernel is 8.3.13, but the DRBD 8.4.3 is much better (4 times in performance and fix many others bug), then i believe that will be fantastic that the Kernel of PVE have always the support for the latest stable version of DRBD.

what do you think?

Best regards
Cesar

 

[dietmar]

what do you think?

I think it is better to use the same version as RHEL and Debian.

 

[cesarpk]

I think it is better to use the same version as RHEL and Debian.

Excuse me dietmar, but I don't understand you
I have installed PVE 3.x and 2.3 of his ISO installer (AFAIK is RHEL6 Kernel with SO Debian)
Also i have executed:
shell# aptitude update && aptitude full-upgrade

Then i run:
shell# modinfo drbd

And i get:
...
version: 8.3.13
...

Then I request if can be that his new kernels have always support for the latest stable version of DRBD (nowadays is 8.4.3)!!! , or ..

Do you think that DRBD 8.3.13 is better that 8.4.3 ?

If the previous question isn't convincing, please thinks that:
1- See the changelog of DRBD (hundreds of bug fixes):
http://git.drbd.org/?p=drbd-8.4.git;a=blob;f=ChangeLog;hb=HEAD

2- See "DRBD 8.4.3 - faster than ever:
http://blogs.linbit.com/p/469/843-random-writes-faster/

3- If PVE team make a survey about of this support to all community, the whole community will vote in favor, ie that not there will a single vote against.

4- Also i think that if you make this change will be a minimal effort to your team

5- Finally, only a request that will benefit to a large majority

In anyway many thanks

Best regards
Cesar

 

[m.ardito]

Excuse me dietmar, but I don't understand you
.....
.....

@cesarpk, why you do repeat all your arguments again?
I think that anyone reading the thread understand veryt well _your_ arguments, but

Dietmar, disagreed and said

I think it is better to use the same version as RHEL and Debian.

so, the best way to follow that answer, if you want to _understand_ Dietmar is to ask him something like:

"Why, in simple terms, you think it is better to use the same version as RHEL and Debian" ?
or
"if it was a paid request, would you agree to support newer drbd versions?"

that would be interesting, not re-reading again and again the original post...

try to be constructive, try to understand, don't try to push pve developer to do something they don't want to do: they may have good reasons: ask them why...


@Dietmar
Why, in simple terms, you think it is better to use the same version as RHEL and Debian? Thanks.

Marco

 

[ebiss]

Why, in simple terms, you think it is better to use the same version as RHEL and Debian? Thanks.
Marco

I think it's because "stable". Use new version,we need a lots test.......

 

[cesarpk]

@cesarpk, why you do repeat all your arguments again?
I think that anyone reading the thread understand veryt well _your_ arguments, but
Dietmar, disagreed and said
so, the best way to follow that answer, if you want to _understand_ Dietmar is to ask him something like:
"Why, in simple terms, you think it is better to use the same version as RHEL and Debian" ?
or
"if it was a paid request, would you agree to support newer drbd versions?"
that would be interesting, not re-reading again and again the original post...
try to be constructive, try to understand, don't try to push pve developer to do something they don't want to do: they may have good reasons: ask them why...
@Dietmar
Why, in simple terms, you think it is better to use the same version as RHEL and Debian? Thanks.
Marco

Right m.ardito, I don't have to push to pve developers for do something they don't want to do, and i must ask them why.
But if you are encouraged to do the survey, I do not object.

Best regards
Cesar

 

[m.ardito]

you could always start a new thread asking people how much they would want your desired drbd upgrade, THAT would show how really others are interested in this.
but pve developers may still have their reasons, if they ever will share those with us..

Marco

 

[dietmar]

@Dietmar
Why, in simple terms, you think it is better to use the same version as RHEL and Debian? Thanks.

Because there is a very large installation base (well tested). Besides, why do you think RHEL use the old versions?

 

[cesarpk]

Because there is a very large installation base (well tested). Besides, why do you think RHEL use the old versions?

It is also well known business model of Red Hat:

1- Red hat always had its eye on large corporations, small and medium enterprises is not among its main goals, then all that Red Hat develops fits within this framework

2- Red Hat is not interested in the existence of Centos, because Centos offers no commercial support, then for them Centos is not competition.

3 - Red hat always supported the use of real storages of Hardware - In the world of big business where entrepreneurs prefer to trust their information stored on devices very safe and can claim immediately in case of any serious problem, then if "Red Hat" supports "DRBD", it would be like to lower his category, because DRBD is only a solution of storage for small businesses, and maybe medium.

4- Red Hat saw more chances of getting into the world of big business with a storage solution for large enterprises, well known as "Gluster", and with the proviso that it will have to go for a long time for that this storage system have a performance really optimal.

5- Another example of this is that Red Hat was never interested in developing iSCSI Server

6- Red hat know about DRBD, his bugs and his bug fixes, but unfortunately for us, they do not care.

7- In conclusion, for its commercial purposes, Red Hat never was interested in DRBD, nor asociarce with Linbit, nor any other storage support available in his kernel, if they have it, is only because "exists", because someone developed it, and what abounds not cause damage.

Best regards
Cesar

 

[dietmar]

7- In conclusion, for its commercial purposes, Red Hat never was interested in DRBD, nor asociarce with Linbit, nor any other storage support available in his kernel, if they have it, is only because "exists", because someone developed it, and what abounds not cause damage.

And you initially wrote:

5- LINBIT is a partner with Red Hat. LINBIT has tested and certified their DRBD product to run on Red Hat Enterprise Linux(RHEL) 5.6+ and RHEL 6.

 

[cesarpk]

And you initially wrote:

Right Dietmar, please excuse me, myself entered a contradiction.

To speak more properly reading this link:
http://www.redhat.com/partners/

We can understand that LinBit have the desire of be partner of Red Hat to offer services based in the solutions that Red Hat offers, and if LinBit is certified by Red Hat, LinBit will have more business opportunities, this figure is very convenient for LinBit and his image in the world

Only one more thing:
If Red Hat think that DRBD is very important, why acquired Gluster instead of DRBD?

Best regards
Cesar

 

[dietmar]

Only one more thing:
If Red Hat think that DRBD is very important, why acquired Gluster instead of DRBD?

Sorry, but why do you ask me?

 

[cesarpk]

Sorry, but why do you ask me?

Hi Dietmar

In reality, the question is not addressed to you directly,
it is only because of my great desire that "PVE" has better support for "DRBD" in his kernel.

Thinking that PVE have hundreds or thousands of companies worldwide that use it with DRBD due to its popularity, speed and solidity i believe that will be fantastic have it (over all with DRBD 8.4.3 by the big jump in speed, that i am thinking use it for MS-SQL Server).

In any case, just a humble request on my part. And if it is considered and have doubts, please organize a survey if it is possible

In anyway i always say that PVE is the best software virtualization Open Source on the world

Best regards
Cesar

 

[adamb]

Hi Dietmar

In reality, the question is not addressed to you directly,
it is only because of my great desire that "PVE" has better support for "DRBD" in his kernel.

Thinking that PVE have hundreds or thousands of companies worldwide that use it with DRBD due to its popularity, speed and solidity i believe that will be fantastic have it (over all with DRBD 8.4.3 by the big jump in speed, that i am thinking use it for MS-SQL Server).

In any case, just a humble request on my part. And if it is considered and have doubts, please organize a survey if it is possible

In anyway i always say that PVE is the best software virtualization Open Source on the world

Best regards
Cesar

For most, performance comes after reliability. 8.4 had some major issues, we are still using 8.3.15 in our CentOS build because 8.4 had so many issues. Performance means nothing if its not stable.

 

[cesarpk]

For most, performance comes after reliability. 8.4 had some major issues, we are still using 8.3.15 in our CentOS build because 8.4 had so many issues. Performance means nothing if its not stable.

Hi adamb

Please let me to do a questions "only about of your DRBD 8.4 Version",
For me and my strategies is of great importance,
(and for now i am using 8.4.2 in production for a Mail Server and others services):

- What version or versions of DRBD exactly did you used?
- Did you have the DRBD connection in NIC to NIC mode?
- Which is the brand and model of your Nics for use with DRBD?
- Did you have updated the latest version of firmware and driver of yours NICs?
- Did the DRBD tuning according to his manual?
- What issues you practiced?
- What action did to solve those problems?
- Can you show your configurations files of DRBD and your logs?

Best regards
Cesar

 

[cesarpk]

I am here again because i want comment a good experience with DRBD 8.4 for richardvd

richardvd for months run DRBD 8.4.2 (instead of the built-in 8.3.x) on Proxmox VE 2.x because of the splitbrain bugs in 8.3
Please see this link:
http://forum.proxmox.com/threads/11...2-update-(kernel-2-6-32-82)?p=64957#post64957