Category Archives: Clustering

Hyper-V Amigos Showcast Episode 8: Storage Replica in a Stretched Cluster

Posted on by
Reply

We finally go to make a next “Hyper-V Amigos Showcast”, due to very busy schedules we had to postpone this a couple of times. But we made it! In this Episode (the 8th one) Carsten and I show one application of a new great feature in Windows Server vNext: Storage Replication. This allows us to replicate a volume between two storage systems without caring what that storage system is as long a you have windows volumes on it. Replication can be synchronous or asynchronous and there are multiple scenarios in which to use this.

Here we focus on trying out replication between two clusters or in a stretched cluster scenario. I have already made a video demonstrating server to server replication. In this showcast we demonstrate  the Stretched Cluster scenario (and troubleshoot our own lab).

image

More info is available here:

Enjoy and see you next time!

Video Interview On Rolling Cluster Upgrades in Windows Server vNext

Posted on by
4

Carsten Rachfahl from Rachfahl IT-Solutions (quite possibly  Germany’s leading Hyper-V, Storage Spaces & Private cloud consultancy) and I got together in Berlin last November at the Microsoft Technical Summit 2014. Between presenting (I delivered What’s new in Failover Clustering in Windows Server 2012 R2), workshops, interviews we found some time to do a video interview.

We discussed a very welcome new capability in Windows Server vNext: “Rolling cluster updates” or “Cluster Operating System Rolling Upgrade” in Windows Server Technical Preview as Microsoft calls it. I blogged about this rather soon after the release of the Technical Preview First experiences with a rolling cluster upgrade of a lab Hyper-V Cluster (Technical Preview).

Videointerview with Didier Van Hoye about Rolling Cluster Upgrade Thumb1

We’ve been able to do rolling updates of Windows NLB for a long time and we’ve been asking for that same capability in Windows Failover Clustering for many years and now, it’s finally coming! And yes, as you will notice we like that a lot!

You need to realize that making the transition form one version to another as smooth, easy and risk free as possible is of great value to the customer as it enables them to upgrade faster and get the benefits of their investment quicker. For Microsoft it means they can have more people move to more modern environments faster which helps with support and delivering value in a secure and modern environment.

At the end we also joke around a bit about DevOps and how this is just as set of training wheels on the road to true site resilience engineering. All fun and all good. Enjoy!

SMB Direct With RoCE in a Mixed Switches Environment

Posted on by
Reply

I’ve been setting up a number of Hyper-V clusters with  Mellanox ConnectX3 Pro dual port 10Gbps Ethernet cards. These Mellanox cards provide a nice amount of queues (128) for DVMQ and also give us RDMA/SMB Direct capabilities for CSV & live migration traffic.

Mixed Switches Environments

Now RoCE and DCB is a learning curve for all of us and not for the faint of heart. DCB configuration is non trivial, certainly not across multiple hops and different switches. Some say it’s to be avoided or can’t be done.

You can only get away with a single pair of (uniform) switches in smaller deployments. On top of that I’m seeing more and more different types of switches being used to optimize value, so it’s not just a lab exercise to do this. Combine this with the fact that DCB is an unavoidable technology in networking, unless it get’s replaced with something better and easier, and you might as well try and learn. So I did.

Well right now I’m successfully seeing RoCE traffic going across cluster nodes spread over different racks in different rows at excellent speeds. The core switches are DELL Force10 S4810 and the rack switches are PowerConnect 8132Fs. By borrowing an approach from spine/leave designs this setup delivers bandwidth where they need it a a price point they can afford. They don’t need more expensive switches for the rack or the core as these do support DCB and give the port count needed at the best price point.  This isn’t supposed to be the top in non blocking network design. Nope but what’s available & affordable today in you hands is better than perfection tomorrow. On top of that this is a functional learning experience for all involved.

We see some pause frames being sent once in a while and this doesn’t impact speed that very much. It does guarantee lossless traffic which is what we need for RoCE. When we live migrate 300GB worth of memory across the nodes in the different racks we get great results. It varies a bit depending on the load the switches & switch ports are under but that’s to be expected.

Now tests have shown us that we can live migrate just as fast with non RDMA 10Gbps as we can with RDMA leveraging “only” Multichannel. So why even bother? The name of the game low latency and preserving CPU cycles for SQL Server or storage traffic over SMB3. Why? We can just buy more CPUs/Cores. Great, easy & fast right? But then with SQL licensing comes into play and it becomes very expensive. Also storage scenarios under heavy load are not where you want to drop packets.

Will this matter in your environment? Great question! It depends on your environment. Sometimes RDMA is needed/warranted, sometimes it isn’t. But the Mellanox cards are price competitive and why not test and learn right? That’s time well spent and prepares you for the future.

But what if it goes wrong … ah well if the nodes fail to connect over RDAM you still have Multichannel and if the DCB stuff turns out not to be what you need or can handle, turn it of and you’ll be good.

RoCE stuff to test: Routing

Some claim it can’t be done reliably. But hey they said that for non uniform switch environments too Winking smile. So will it all fall apart and will we need to standardize on iWarp in the future?  Maybe, but isn’t DCB the technology used for lossless, high performance environments (FCoE but also iSCSI) so why would not iWarp not need it. Sure it works without it quite well. So does iSCSI right, up to a point? I see these comments a lot more form virtualization admins that have a hard time doing DCB (I’m one so I do sympathize) than I see it from hard core network engineers. As I have RoCE cards and they have become routable now with the latest firmware and drivers I’d love to try and see if I can make RoCE v2 or Routable RoCE work over different types of switches but unless some one is going to sponsor the hardware I can’t even start doing that. Anyway, lossless is the name of the game whether it’s iWarp or RoCE. Who know what we’ll be doing in 5 years? 100Gbps iWarp & iSCSI both covered by DCB vNext while FC, FCoE, Infiniband & RoCE have fallen into oblivion? We’ll see.

More Tips On Dealing With Removing Short File Names When Migrating To a SMB3 Transparent Failover File Server Cluster

Posted on by
2

You might have read my blog posts on the capabilities and the process of migrating to a Transparent Failover File Server. If not, here they are:

These are a good read with some advice from real world experience and in this post I’ll offer some more tips. I’ve discussed the need to disable and get rid of short file names in my blog and offered other tips to prepare for your migration and get your file share LUNs in tip top, modern shape. But what if you run into short file name issues where you can seem to get rid of them?

Well here’s 3 more things to check:

1) Get rid of the shadow copies used for Previous Versions

The reason you’d better get rid of them is that they can also contain short files names & way to long path or file names. We don’t want them to ruin the party so we remove them all by disabling shadow copies on the LUNs to be copied. We can enable them again once the LUN is up and running in the new file cluster.

2) The logs indicate there are short file names you don’t have access to

If the NFTS permissions on the folder & file structure are OK you should not have to much problems bar some files being locked by being in use. Rerunning the fsutil command prior to migrating with the server service stopped will prevent any connectivity and use of file shares by people ignoring the request to log of or shut down their clients or automated jobs that otherwise keep accessing them.

But you might still get some indications in the log file(s) that state you can remove certain file names.

image

There is the good old trick of running your command under SYSTEM. That those the job! That helps get rid of short file name instances of folders where you normally don’t get access to. If system has rights you’ll be fine whether it’s a system folder or not.To do this the Sysinternals tools come in handy once again. You can launch a command prompt running under the NT AUTHORITYSYSTEM account using psexec.exe by running the following from a elevated command prompt:

psexec -i -s cmd.exe or psexec  -s cmd.exe

image

The-s switch runs the remote process in the System account. Psexec temporarily installs a service "psexec running psexesvc.exe" on the remote computer (or locally if that’s what you doing) which is removed when the app or process that’s running is closed. It’s obvious now I hope why you need an elevated command prompt to run this command.

Now should you do this by default? Nope. Just when you need to and as always have a realistic backup plan, a way to recover when things go south.

3) Anti virus sometime prevents the removal of short file names

Disable Anti-Virus, sometimes it holds a temporary entry in the registry for the file involved. At least that’s what I’ve seen as a transient issue in some of the large number of logs I gathered. Yeah, I ran a lot of fsutil against large NTFS volumes. What can I say. Due diligence pays off!

4) Run ChkDsk

Just make sure the volume is healthy and no repairs are needed. If your migrating from and older file server there might be outstanding issues and a check disk on volumes with lot’s of files take time. Some of the ones I’ve dealt with had more that 2 million files on a 2TB LUN and it it can take 24 hours. Fun when you have 10 LUNs :-/