b0337e125c
Replaced 'metrics' with 'meters' in all contexts, excluding the metric system or where the term is used as name. Change-Id: If4c32dfe92c28a2079a485a6aec1d61c7b9999a1 Closes-Bug: #1446518
822 lines
39 KiB
XML
822 lines
39 KiB
XML
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
|
|
<!DOCTYPE section [
|
|
<!ENTITY % openstack SYSTEM "../../common/entities/openstack.ent">
|
|
%openstack;
|
|
]>
|
|
<section xmlns="http://docbook.org/ns/docbook"
|
|
xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude"
|
|
xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"
|
|
version="5.0"
|
|
xml:id="arch-guide-architecture-overview">
|
|
<?dbhtml stop-chunking?>
|
|
<title>Architecture</title>
|
|
<para>Hardware selection involves three key areas:</para>
|
|
<itemizedlist>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Compute</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Network</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Storage</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</itemizedlist>
|
|
<para>Selecting hardware for a general purpose OpenStack cloud
|
|
should reflect a cloud with no pre-defined usage model.
|
|
General purpose clouds are designed to run a wide variety of
|
|
applications with varying resource usage requirements.
|
|
These applications include any of the following:</para>
|
|
<itemizedlist>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>
|
|
RAM-intensive
|
|
</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>
|
|
CPU-intensive
|
|
</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>
|
|
Storage-intensive
|
|
</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</itemizedlist>
|
|
<para>Choosing hardware for a general purpose OpenStack cloud
|
|
must provide balanced access to all major resources.</para>
|
|
<para>Certain hardware form factors may better suit a general
|
|
purpose OpenStack cloud due to the requirement for equal (or
|
|
nearly equal) balance of resources. Server hardware must provide
|
|
the following:</para>
|
|
<itemizedlist>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>
|
|
Equal (or nearly equal) balance of compute capacity (RAM and CPU)
|
|
</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>
|
|
Network capacity (number and speed of links)
|
|
</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>
|
|
Storage capacity (gigabytes or terabytes as well as Input/Output
|
|
Operations Per Second (<glossterm>IOPS</glossterm>)
|
|
</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</itemizedlist>
|
|
<para>Server hardware is evaluated around four conflicting
|
|
dimensions.</para>
|
|
<variablelist>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Server density</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>A measure of how many servers can
|
|
fit into a given measure of physical space, such as a
|
|
rack unit [U].</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Resource capacity</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>The number of CPU cores, how much
|
|
RAM, or how much storage a given server will
|
|
deliver.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Expandability</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>The number of additional resources
|
|
that can be added to a server before it has reached
|
|
its limit.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Cost</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>The relative purchase price of the hardware
|
|
weighted against the level of design effort needed to
|
|
build the system.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
</variablelist>
|
|
<para>Increasing server density means sacrificing resource
|
|
capacity or expandability, however, increasing resource
|
|
capacity and expandability increases cost and decreases server
|
|
density. As a result, determining the best server hardware for
|
|
a general purpose OpenStack architecture means understanding
|
|
how choice of form factor will impact the rest of the
|
|
design. The following list outlines the form factors to
|
|
choose from:</para>
|
|
<itemizedlist>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Blade servers typically support dual-socket
|
|
multi-core CPUs, which is the configuration generally
|
|
considered to be the "sweet spot" for a general
|
|
purpose cloud deployment. Blades also offer
|
|
outstanding density. As an example, both HP
|
|
BladeSystem and Dell PowerEdge M1000e support up to 16
|
|
servers in only 10 rack units. However, the blade
|
|
servers themselves often have limited storage and
|
|
networking capacity. Additionally, the expandability
|
|
of many blade servers can be limited.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>1U rack-mounted servers occupy only a single rack
|
|
unit. Their benefits include high density, support for
|
|
dual-socket multi-core CPUs, and support for
|
|
reasonable RAM amounts. This form factor offers
|
|
limited storage capacity, limited network capacity,
|
|
and limited expandability.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>2U rack-mounted servers offer the expanded storage
|
|
and networking capacity that 1U servers tend to lack,
|
|
but with a corresponding decrease in server density
|
|
(half the density offered by 1U rack-mounted
|
|
servers).</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Larger rack-mounted servers, such as 4U servers,
|
|
will tend to offer even greater CPU capacity, often
|
|
supporting four or even eight CPU sockets. These
|
|
servers often have much greater expandability so will
|
|
provide the best option for upgradability. This means,
|
|
however, that the servers have a much lower server
|
|
density and a much greater hardware cost.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>"Sled servers" are rack-mounted servers that support
|
|
multiple independent servers in a single 2U or 3U
|
|
enclosure. This form factor offers increased density
|
|
over typical 1U-2U rack-mounted servers but tends to
|
|
suffer from limitations in the amount of storage or
|
|
network capacity each individual server
|
|
supports.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</itemizedlist>
|
|
<para>The best form factor for server hardware
|
|
supporting a general purpose OpenStack cloud is driven by
|
|
outside business and cost factors. No single reference
|
|
architecture will apply to all implementations; the decision
|
|
must flow from user requirements, technical
|
|
considerations, and operational considerations. Here are some
|
|
of the key factors that influence the selection of server
|
|
hardware:</para>
|
|
<variablelist>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Instance density</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Sizing is an important
|
|
consideration for a general purpose OpenStack cloud.
|
|
The expected or anticipated number of instances that
|
|
each hypervisor can host is a common meter used in
|
|
sizing the deployment. The selected server hardware
|
|
needs to support the expected or anticipated instance
|
|
density.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Host density</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Physical data centers have limited
|
|
physical space, power, and cooling. The number of
|
|
hosts (or hypervisors) that can be fitted into a given
|
|
metric (rack, rack unit, or floor tile) is another
|
|
important method of sizing. Floor weight is an often
|
|
overlooked consideration. The data center floor must
|
|
be able to support the weight of the proposed number
|
|
of hosts within a rack or set of racks. These factors
|
|
need to be applied as part of the host density
|
|
calculation and server hardware selection.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Power density</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Data centers have a specified amount
|
|
of power fed to a given rack or set of racks. Older
|
|
data centers may have a power density as power as low
|
|
as 20 AMPs per rack, while more recent data centers
|
|
can be architected to support power densities as high
|
|
as 120 AMP per rack. The selected server hardware must
|
|
take power density into account.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Network connectivity</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>The selected server hardware
|
|
must have the appropriate number of network
|
|
connections, as well as the right type of network
|
|
connections, in order to support the proposed
|
|
architecture. Ensure that, at a minimum, there are at
|
|
least two diverse network connections coming into each
|
|
rack. For architectures requiring even more
|
|
redundancy, it might be necessary to confirm that the
|
|
network connections are from diverse telecom
|
|
providers. Many data centers have that capacity
|
|
available.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
</variablelist>
|
|
<para>The selection of form factors or architectures affects the selection
|
|
of server hardware. For example, if the design is a scale-out storage architecture,
|
|
then the server hardware selection will require careful consideration
|
|
when matching the requirements set to the commercial solution.</para>
|
|
<para>Ensure that the selected server hardware
|
|
is configured to support enough storage capacity (or storage
|
|
expandability) to match the requirements of selected scale-out
|
|
storage solution. For example, if a centralized storage
|
|
solution is required, such as a centralized storage array from
|
|
a storage vendor that has InfiniBand or FDDI connections, the
|
|
server hardware will need to have appropriate network adapters
|
|
installed to be compatible with the storage array vendor's
|
|
specifications.</para>
|
|
<para>Similarly, the network architecture will have an impact on
|
|
the server hardware selection and vice versa. For example,
|
|
make sure that the server is configured with enough additional
|
|
network ports and expansion cards to support all of the
|
|
networks required. There is variability in network expansion
|
|
cards, so it is important to be aware of potential impacts or
|
|
interoperability issues with other components in the
|
|
architecture.</para>
|
|
<section xml:id="selecting-storage-hardware">
|
|
<title>Selecting storage hardware</title>
|
|
<para>Storage hardware architecture is largely determined by the
|
|
selected storage architecture. The selection of storage
|
|
architecture, as well as the corresponding storage hardware,
|
|
is determined by evaluating possible solutions against the
|
|
critical factors, the user requirements, technical
|
|
considerations, and operational considerations. Factors that need to be
|
|
incorporated into the storage architecture include:</para>
|
|
<variablelist>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Cost</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Storage can be a significant portion of the
|
|
overall system cost. For an organization that is concerned
|
|
with vendor support, a commercial storage solution is
|
|
advisable, although it comes with a higher price
|
|
tag. If initial capital expenditure requires
|
|
minimization, designing a system based on commodity
|
|
hardware would apply. The trade-off is potentially
|
|
higher support costs and a greater risk of
|
|
incompatibility and interoperability issues.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Scalability</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Scalability, along with expandability, is a major
|
|
consideration in a general purpose OpenStack cloud. It
|
|
might be difficult to predict the final intended size
|
|
of the implementation as there are no established
|
|
usage patterns for a general purpose cloud. It might
|
|
become necessary to expand the initial deployment in
|
|
order to accommodate growth and user demand.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Expandability</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Expandability is a major architecture factor for
|
|
storage solutions with general purpose OpenStack
|
|
cloud. A storage solution that expands
|
|
to 50 PB is considered more expandable than a
|
|
solution that only scales to 10 PB. This meter is
|
|
related to, but different, from scalability, which is a
|
|
measure of the solution's performance as it expands. For example, the storage
|
|
architecture for a cloud that is intended for a development
|
|
platform may not have the same expandability and scalability
|
|
requirements as a cloud that is intended for a
|
|
commercial product.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
</variablelist>
|
|
<para>Using a scale-out storage solution with direct-attached
|
|
storage (DAS) in the servers is well suited for a general
|
|
purpose OpenStack cloud.
|
|
For example, it is possible to populate storage in either the compute
|
|
hosts similar to a grid computing solution, or into hosts dedicated to
|
|
providing block storage exclusively. When deploying storage in the
|
|
compute hosts appropriate hardware, that can support both the
|
|
storage and compute services on the same hardware, will be required.</para>
|
|
<para>Understanding the requirements of cloud services will help
|
|
determine what scale-out solution should be used. Determining if
|
|
a single, highly expandable and highly vertical, scalable,
|
|
centralized storage array should be included in the design.
|
|
Once an approach has been determined, the storage hardware
|
|
needs to be selected based on this criteria.</para>
|
|
<para>This list expands upon the potential impacts for including a
|
|
particular storage architecture (and corresponding storage
|
|
hardware) into the design for a general purpose OpenStack
|
|
cloud:</para>
|
|
<variablelist>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Connectivity</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Ensure that, if storage protocols
|
|
other than Ethernet are part of the storage solution,
|
|
the appropriate hardware has been selected.
|
|
If a centralized storage array is selected, ensure
|
|
that the hypervisor will be able to connect to that
|
|
storage array for image storage.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Usage</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>How the particular storage architecture will
|
|
be used is critical for determining the architecture.
|
|
Some of the configurations that will influence the
|
|
architecture include whether it will be used by the
|
|
hypervisors for ephemeral instance storage or if
|
|
OpenStack Object Storage will use it for object storage.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Instance and image locations</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>
|
|
Where instances and images will be stored will influence
|
|
the architecture.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Server hardware</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>If the solution is a scale-out
|
|
storage architecture that includes DAS, it
|
|
will affect the server hardware selection. This could
|
|
ripple into the decisions that affect host density,
|
|
instance density, power density, OS-hypervisor,
|
|
management tools and others.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
</variablelist>
|
|
<para>General purpose OpenStack cloud has multiple options.
|
|
The key factors that will have an influence
|
|
on selection of storage hardware for a general purpose
|
|
OpenStack cloud are as follows:</para>
|
|
<variablelist>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Capacity</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Hardware resources selected for the resource nodes
|
|
should be capable of supporting enough storage for the
|
|
cloud services. Defining the initial requirements and
|
|
ensuring the design can support adding capacity is
|
|
important. Hardware nodes selected for object storage
|
|
should be capable of support a large number of inexpensive
|
|
disks with no reliance on RAID controller cards.
|
|
Hardware nodes selected for block storage should be capable
|
|
of supporting high speed storage solutions and RAID controller
|
|
cards to provide performance and redundancy to storage at a
|
|
hardware level.
|
|
Selecting hardware RAID controllers that automatically repair
|
|
damaged arrays will assist with the replacement and repair of
|
|
degraded or destroyed storage devices.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Performance</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Disks selected for object storage services do not need
|
|
to be fast performing disks. We recommend that object storage
|
|
nodes take advantage of the best cost per terabyte available
|
|
for storage. Contrastingly, disks chosen for block storage
|
|
services should take advantage of performance boosting
|
|
features that may entail the use of SSDs or flash storage
|
|
to provide high performance block storage pools. Storage
|
|
performance of ephemeral disks used for instances should
|
|
also be taken into consideration. If compute pools are
|
|
expected to have a high utilization of ephemeral storage,
|
|
or requires very high performance, it would be advantageous
|
|
to deploy similar hardware solutions to block storage.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Fault tolerance</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Object storage resource nodes have
|
|
no requirements for hardware fault tolerance or RAID
|
|
controllers. It is not necessary to plan for fault
|
|
tolerance within the object storage hardware because
|
|
the object storage service provides replication
|
|
between zones as a feature of the service. Block
|
|
storage nodes, compute nodes and cloud controllers
|
|
should all have fault tolerance built in at the
|
|
hardware level by making use of hardware RAID
|
|
controllers and varying levels of RAID configuration.
|
|
The level of RAID chosen should be consistent with the
|
|
performance and availability requirements of the
|
|
cloud.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
</variablelist>
|
|
</section>
|
|
<section xml:id="selecting-networking-hardware">
|
|
<title>Selecting networking hardware</title>
|
|
<para>Selecting network architecture determines which network
|
|
hardware will be used. Networking software is determined by
|
|
the selected networking hardware.
|
|
For example, selecting networking hardware that only supports
|
|
Gigabit Ethernet (GbE) will impact the overall design. Similarly,
|
|
deciding to use 10 Gigabit Ethernet (10 GbE) will have a
|
|
number of impacts on various areas of the overall design.</para>
|
|
<para>There are more subtle design impacts that need to be considered.
|
|
The selection of certain networking hardware (and the networking software)
|
|
affects the management tools that can be used. There are
|
|
exceptions to this; the rise of "open" networking software
|
|
that supports a range of networking hardware means that there
|
|
are instances where the relationship between networking
|
|
hardware and networking software are not as tightly defined.
|
|
An example of this type of software is Cumulus Linux, which is
|
|
capable of running on a number of switch vendor's hardware
|
|
solutions.</para>
|
|
<para>Some of the key considerations that should be included in
|
|
the selection of networking hardware include:</para>
|
|
<variablelist>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Port count</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>The design will require networking
|
|
hardware that has the requisite port count.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Port density</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>The network design will be affected by
|
|
the physical space that is required to provide the
|
|
requisite port count. A higher port density is preferred,
|
|
as it leaves more rack space for compute or storage components
|
|
that may be required by the design. This can also lead into
|
|
concerns about fault domains and power density that
|
|
should be considered. Higher density switches are more
|
|
expensive and should also be considered, as it is
|
|
important not to over design the network if it is not
|
|
required.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Port speed</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>
|
|
The networking hardware must support the proposed
|
|
network speed, for example: 1 GbE, 10 GbE, or
|
|
40 GbE (or even 100 GbE).</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Redundancy</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>The level of network hardware redundancy
|
|
required is influenced by the user requirements for
|
|
high availability and cost considerations. Network
|
|
redundancy can be achieved by adding redundant power
|
|
supplies or paired switches. If this is a requirement,
|
|
the hardware will need to support this configuration.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Power requirements</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Ensure that the physical data
|
|
center provides the necessary power for the selected
|
|
network hardware.</para>
|
|
<note>
|
|
<para>
|
|
This may be an issue for spine switches in a leaf and
|
|
spine fabric, or end of row (EoR) switches.</para>
|
|
</note>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
</variablelist>
|
|
<para>There is no single best practice architecture for the
|
|
networking hardware supporting a general purpose OpenStack
|
|
cloud that will apply to all implementations. Some of the key
|
|
factors that will have a strong influence on selection of
|
|
networking hardware include:</para>
|
|
<variablelist>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Connectivity</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>All nodes within an OpenStack cloud
|
|
require network connectivity. In some
|
|
cases, nodes require access to more than one network
|
|
segment. The design must encompass sufficient network
|
|
capacity and bandwidth to ensure that all
|
|
communications within the cloud, both north-south and
|
|
east-west traffic have sufficient resources
|
|
available.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Scalability</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>The network design should
|
|
encompass a physical and logical network design that
|
|
can be easily expanded upon. Network hardware should
|
|
offer the appropriate types of interfaces and speeds
|
|
that are required by the hardware nodes.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Availability</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>To ensure that access to nodes within
|
|
the cloud is not interrupted, we recommend that
|
|
the network architecture identify any single points of
|
|
failure and provide some level of redundancy or fault
|
|
tolerance. With regard to the network infrastructure
|
|
itself, this often involves use of networking
|
|
protocols such as LACP, VRRP or others to achieve a
|
|
highly available network connection. In addition, it
|
|
is important to consider the networking implications
|
|
on API availability. In order to ensure that the APIs,
|
|
and potentially other services in the cloud are highly
|
|
available, we recommend you design a load balancing
|
|
solution within the network architecture to
|
|
accommodate for these requirements.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
</variablelist>
|
|
</section>
|
|
<section xml:id="software-selection">
|
|
<title>Software selection</title>
|
|
<para>Software selection for a general purpose OpenStack
|
|
architecture design needs to include these three areas:</para>
|
|
<itemizedlist>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Operating system (OS) and hypervisor</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>OpenStack components</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Supplemental software</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</itemizedlist>
|
|
</section>
|
|
<section xml:id="os-and-hypervisor">
|
|
<title>Operating system and hypervisor</title>
|
|
<para>The operating system (OS) and hypervisor have a
|
|
significant impact on the overall design. Selecting a particular
|
|
operating system and hypervisor can directly affect server
|
|
hardware selection. Make sure the storage
|
|
hardware and topology support the selected operating
|
|
system and hypervisor combination. Also ensure the networking
|
|
hardware selection and topology will work with the chosen operating
|
|
system and hypervisor combination. For example, if the design uses Link Aggregation
|
|
Control Protocol (LACP), the OS and hypervisor both need to
|
|
support it.</para>
|
|
<para>Some areas that could be impacted by the selection of OS and
|
|
hypervisor include:</para>
|
|
<variablelist>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Cost</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Selecting a commercially supported hypervisor,
|
|
such as Microsoft Hyper-V, will result in a different
|
|
cost model rather than community-supported open source
|
|
hypervisors including <glossterm
|
|
baseform="kernel-based VM (KVM)">KVM</glossterm>,
|
|
Kinstance or <glossterm>Xen</glossterm>. When
|
|
comparing open source OS solutions, choosing Ubuntu
|
|
over Red Hat (or vice versa) will have an impact on
|
|
cost due to support contracts.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Supportability</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Depending on the selected
|
|
hypervisor, staff should have the appropriate
|
|
training and knowledge to support the selected OS and
|
|
hypervisor combination. If they do not, training will
|
|
need to be provided which could have a cost impact on
|
|
the design.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Management tools</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>The management tools used for
|
|
Ubuntu and Kinstance differ from the management tools
|
|
for VMware vSphere. Although both OS and hypervisor
|
|
combinations are supported by OpenStack, there will be
|
|
very different impacts to the rest of the design as a
|
|
result of the selection of one combination versus the
|
|
other.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Scale and performance</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Ensure that selected OS and
|
|
hypervisor combinations meet the appropriate scale and
|
|
performance requirements. The chosen architecture will
|
|
need to meet the targeted instance-host ratios with
|
|
the selected OS-hypervisor combinations.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Security</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Ensure that the design can accommodate
|
|
regular periodic installations of application security
|
|
patches while maintaining required workloads. The
|
|
frequency of security patches for the proposed
|
|
OS-hypervisor combination will have an impact on
|
|
performance and the patch installation process could
|
|
affect maintenance windows.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Supported features</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Determine which features of OpenStack are required.
|
|
This will often determine the selection of the OS-hypervisor combination.
|
|
Some features are only available with specific OSs or
|
|
hypervisors. For example, if certain features are not
|
|
available, the design might need to be modified to
|
|
meet the user requirements.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
<varlistentry>
|
|
<term>Interoperability</term>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>You will need to consider how the OS and hypervisor combination
|
|
interactions with other operating systems and hypervisors, including
|
|
other software solutions.
|
|
Operational troubleshooting tools for one OS-hypervisor
|
|
combination may differ from the tools used for another OS-hypervisor
|
|
combination and, as a result, the design will need to
|
|
address if the two sets of tools need to interoperate.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</varlistentry>
|
|
</variablelist>
|
|
</section>
|
|
<section xml:id="openstack-components">
|
|
<title>OpenStack components</title>
|
|
<para>Selecting which OpenStack components are included in the overall
|
|
design can have a significant impact. Some OpenStack components, like
|
|
compute and Image service, are required in every architecture. Other
|
|
components, like Orchestration, are not always required.</para>
|
|
<para>Excluding certain OpenStack components can limit or constrain
|
|
the functionality of other components. For example, if the architecture includes
|
|
Orchestration but excludes Telemetry, then the design will not be able
|
|
to take advantage of Orchestrations' auto scaling functionality.
|
|
It is important to research the component interdependencies
|
|
in conjunction with the technical requirements before deciding
|
|
on the final architecture.</para>
|
|
<section xml:id="supplemental-components">
|
|
<title>Supplemental components</title>
|
|
<para>While OpenStack is a fairly complete collection of software
|
|
projects for building a platform for cloud services, there are
|
|
invariably additional pieces of software that need to be
|
|
considered in any given OpenStack design.</para>
|
|
</section>
|
|
</section>
|
|
<section xml:id="networking-software">
|
|
<title>Networking software</title>
|
|
<para>OpenStack Networking provides a wide variety of networking
|
|
services for instances. There are many additional networking
|
|
software packages that can be useful when managing OpenStack
|
|
components. Some examples include:</para>
|
|
<itemizedlist>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>
|
|
Software to provide load balancing
|
|
</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>
|
|
Network redundancy protocols
|
|
</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>
|
|
Routing daemons
|
|
</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</itemizedlist>
|
|
<para>Some of these software packages are described
|
|
in more detail in the <citetitle>OpenStack High Availability
|
|
Guide</citetitle> (refer to the <link
|
|
xlink:href="http://docs.openstack.org/high-availability-guide/content/ch-network.html">Network
|
|
controller cluster stack chapter</link> of the OpenStack High
|
|
Availability Guide).</para>
|
|
<para>For a general purpose OpenStack cloud, the OpenStack
|
|
infrastructure components need to be highly available. If
|
|
the design does not include hardware load balancing,
|
|
networking software packages like HAProxy will need to be
|
|
included.</para>
|
|
</section>
|
|
<section xml:id="management-software">
|
|
<title>Management software</title>
|
|
<para>Selected supplemental software solution impacts and
|
|
affects the overall OpenStack cloud design. This includes
|
|
software for providing clustering, logging, monitoring and
|
|
alerting.</para>
|
|
<para>Inclusion of clustering software, such as Corosync or
|
|
Pacemaker, is determined primarily by the availability
|
|
requirements. The impact of including (or not
|
|
including) these software packages is primarily determined by
|
|
the availability of the cloud infrastructure and the
|
|
complexity of supporting the configuration after it is
|
|
deployed. The <link xlink:href="http://docs.openstack.org/high-availability-guide/"><citetitle>OpenStack High Availability Guide</citetitle></link>
|
|
provides more
|
|
details on the installation and configuration of Corosync and
|
|
Pacemaker, should these packages need to be included in the
|
|
design.</para>
|
|
<para>Requirements for logging, monitoring, and alerting are
|
|
determined by operational considerations. Each of these
|
|
sub-categories includes a number of various options. For example,
|
|
in the logging sub-category one might consider Logstash, Splunk, instanceware
|
|
Log Insight, or some other log aggregation-consolidation tool. Logs
|
|
should be stored in a centralized location to make it easier to perform
|
|
analytics against the data. Log data analytics
|
|
engines can also provide automation and issue notification by providing a mechanism to
|
|
both alert and automatically attempt to remediate some of the
|
|
more commonly known issues.</para>
|
|
<para>If these software packages are required, the
|
|
design must account for the additional resource consumption
|
|
(CPU, RAM, storage, and network bandwidth). Some other potential
|
|
design impacts include:</para>
|
|
<itemizedlist>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>OS-hypervisor combination: Ensure that the
|
|
selected logging, monitoring, or alerting tools
|
|
support the proposed OS-hypervisor combination.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
<listitem>
|
|
<para>Network hardware: The network hardware selection
|
|
needs to be supported by the logging, monitoring, and
|
|
alerting software.</para>
|
|
</listitem>
|
|
</itemizedlist>
|
|
</section>
|
|
<section xml:id="database-software">
|
|
<title>Database software</title>
|
|
<para>OpenStack components often require access
|
|
to back-end database services to store state and configuration
|
|
information. Selecting an appropriate back-end database
|
|
that satisfies the availability and fault tolerance
|
|
requirements of the OpenStack services is required. OpenStack
|
|
services supports connecting to a database that is supported
|
|
by the SQLAlchemy python drivers, however, most common
|
|
database deployments make use of MySQL or variations of it. We
|
|
recommend that the database, which provides back-end
|
|
service within a general purpose cloud, be made highly
|
|
available when using an available technology which can
|
|
accomplish that goal.</para>
|
|
</section>
|
|
<section xml:id="addressing-performance-sensitive-workloads">
|
|
<title>Addressing performance-sensitive workloads</title>
|
|
<para>Although one of the key defining factors for a general
|
|
purpose OpenStack cloud is that performance is not a
|
|
determining factor, there may still be some
|
|
performance-sensitive workloads deployed on the general
|
|
purpose OpenStack cloud. For design guidance on
|
|
performance-sensitive workloads, we recommend that you refer to
|
|
the focused scenarios later in this guide. The
|
|
resource-focused guides can be used as a supplement to this
|
|
guide to help with decisions regarding performance-sensitive
|
|
workloads.</para>
|
|
</section>
|
|
<section xml:id="compute-focused-workloads">
|
|
<title>Compute-focused workloads</title>
|
|
<para>In an OpenStack cloud that is compute-focused, there are
|
|
some design choices that can help accommodate those workloads.
|
|
Compute-focused workloads demand more CPU and memory
|
|
resources with lower priority given to storage and network performance.
|
|
For guidance on designing for this type of cloud, please refer
|
|
to <xref linkend="compute_focus"/>.</para>
|
|
</section>
|
|
<section xml:id="network-focused-workloads">
|
|
<title>Network-focused workloads</title>
|
|
<para>In a network-focused OpenStack cloud, some design choices can
|
|
improve the performance of these types of workloads.
|
|
Network-focused workloads have extreme demands on network
|
|
bandwidth and services that require specialized consideration
|
|
and planning. For guidance on designing for this type of
|
|
cloud, please refer to <xref linkend="network_focus"/>.</para>
|
|
</section>
|
|
<section xml:id="storage-focused-workloads">
|
|
<title>Storage-focused workloads</title>
|
|
<para>
|
|
Storage focused OpenStack clouds need to be designed to
|
|
accommodate workloads that have extreme demands on either
|
|
object or block storage services. For guidance on designing for this
|
|
type of cloud, please refer to <xref linkend="storage_focus"/>.
|
|
</para>
|
|
</section>
|
|
</section>
|