• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Does Hypervisor Matter in OpenStack?
 

Does Hypervisor Matter in OpenStack?

on

  • 4,200 views

A presentation by Greg Elkinbard, Mirantis Senior Technical Director, featured at OpenStack Summit in Hong Kong on November 5, 2013

A presentation by Greg Elkinbard, Mirantis Senior Technical Director, featured at OpenStack Summit in Hong Kong on November 5, 2013

Statistics

Views

Total Views
4,200
Views on SlideShare
2,594
Embed Views
1,606

Actions

Likes
3
Downloads
82
Comments
0

4 Embeds 1,606

http://www.mirantis.com 1588
http://ha.mirantis.com 16
https://www.mirantis.com 1
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Does Hypervisor Matter in OpenStack? Does Hypervisor Matter in OpenStack? Presentation Transcript

    • Does Hypervisor Matter in OpenStack Greg Elkinbard Senior Technical Director ©  MIRANTIS  2012   PAGE  1  
    • Outline •  Brief History of Time: Hypervisor Requests •  2011, 2012, 2013 •  Trends in Different Segments •  Opportunities and Challenges ©  MIRANTIS  2012   PAGE  2  
    • 2011 •  Hypervisors •  XEN •  Default choice given Rackspace and Amazon use •  KVM •  Bleeding edge users ©  MIRANTIS  2012   PAGE  3  
    • 2012 •  Hypervisors •  KVM •  Emerges as the lead •  XEN •  Loses momentum ©  MIRANTIS  2012   PAGE  4  
    • 2013 •  Hypervisors •  KVM •  Maintains lead (around 90%+ for Mirantis) •  Vmware •  Emerges as a surprising second choice •  Containers (LXC, Parallels, Docker) •  Web Hosting and SAS focused •  Xen and HyperV •  Infrequent requests ©  MIRANTIS  2012   PAGE  5  
    • Trends •  Telco/ISP public clouds •  Single hypervisor •  KVM •  Internet focused companies •  Single hypervisor •  KVM •  Web Hosting and SAS sub-segments •  Single or multi hypervisors •  Containers (LXC, Parallels, Docker) •  KVM •  Enterprise •  Multi hypervisors •  KVM and vCenter/ESXi ©  MIRANTIS  2012   PAGE  6  
    • Opportunities and Challenges •  Multi-hypervisor use cases •  Advantages and Issues •  KVM •  vCenter/ESXi •  Containers (LXC, Docker, Parallels) ©  MIRANTIS  2012   PAGE  7  
    • Multi Hypervisor Use Cases •  Existing virtualization infrastructure •  Extend instead of replace •  Provide a common API •  Hedge bets against bugs and vendor pricing •  Utilize additional features •  Virtual appliances not supported by other platforms •  Advanced features not directly supported by OpenStack ©  MIRANTIS  2012   PAGE  8  
    • KVM •  Currently about 90%+ of requests, 95%+ of deployments •  Type 2 hypervisor •  Relies on a distro •  Relatively easy to add new devices •  Easy to tune to get good performance •  Flexibility creates speedup opportunities •  Mellanox e-switch •  Intel DPDK vswitch •  Few issues •  Mostly distro related ©  MIRANTIS  2012   PAGE  9  
    • KVM Tuning •  We use KVM for HPC and NFV •  Extensive set of tunings •  Short Summary •  •  •  •  •  •  •  BIOS to max performance Enable huge pages On RHEL tune for virtualization Libvirt configure host pass-through for CPU flags Increase TCP buffers and processor input queue Congestion control to htcp Enable jumbo frames ©  MIRANTIS  2012   PAGE  10  
    • KVM performance results •  KVM with OVS •  With tuning 7-8 Gbits/s VM throughput (jumbo frames) •  KVM with Mellanox •  Throughput host to host: 19.4 Gbit/s •  VM to VM on same host: 13.9 Gbit/s •  VM to VM on different hosts: 23.1 Gbit/s •  KVM with Intel OVS DPDK •  Alternative to dedicated hardware •  Good performance even for small packets •  7Gbit/s for 64 byte packets •  9.6Gbit/s for 512 byte packets ©  MIRANTIS  2012   PAGE  11  
    • KVM Features and Issues •  Widest set of OpenStack Features •  https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/HypervisorSupportMatrix •  Issues •  Difficult to transfer images from other hypervisors •  Older versions of QEMU in RHEL/CentOS require virtio drivers •  SCSI emulation in Ubuntu •  Updated CentOS with latest QEMU ©  MIRANTIS  2012   PAGE  12  
    • VMware ESXi •  Currently about 8-10% of requests, 5%+ of deployments •  Primarily vCenter •  Type 1 hypervisor •  Does not need a linux distro •  VMware controls the code, 3rd party packages must be signed. •  VMware is supporting both ESXi and vCenter APIs ©  MIRANTIS  2012   PAGE  13  
    • VMware OpenStack Compatibility •  Good compatibility with OpenStack Features •  https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/HypervisorSupportMatrix •  Pause, Un-Pause and Resize missing •  Caveats (Grizzly) •  Network integration •  Nova-net no security groups •  Neutron requires Nicira commercial plugin •  •  •  •  Glance integration inefficient Only a single datastore is supported With Cinder only iSCSI type volumes are supported Only linked clones are supported ©  MIRANTIS  2012   PAGE  14  
    • Vmware OpenStack Havana •  Linked and Full clones are supported •  Multiple VC clusters can be managed by a single driver •  Config drive support •  Cinder support for VMDK based Volumes •  vShield Edge Driver support for NVP plugin (FWaaS, LBaaS) ©  MIRANTIS  2012   PAGE  15  
    • VMware Networking •  Nicira NVP/NSX •  Cisco 1000V (future) •  Accelerated Options •  NVP using STT •  VN-Tag, SR-IOV & Cisco Switches (VM-FEX) ©  MIRANTIS  2012   PAGE  16  
    • Containers •  Currently about 5%+ of requests, 0 deployments •  Low overhead alternative •  Hundreds of guests •  All Apps belong to a single tenant •  Fragmented space •  LXC •  Parallels •  Docker •  Limited OpenStack support but interest is growing ©  MIRANTIS  2012   PAGE  17  
    • LXC OpenStack Support •  VM – only launch, reboot and terminate •  Networking – basic VLANs •  Possible to get Neutron/OVS to work •  Volumes – officially no Cinder support •  Possible to hack something ©  MIRANTIS  2012   PAGE  18