noob: 3 server home uec setup

i know setting up uec for the home sounds like overkill but i'm contemplating a home setup for the sake of academia. but i do have a few questions:

1. looking at the minimum and recommended requirements from the documentation https://help.ubuntu.com/10.10/serverguide/C/uec.html, wouldn't the numbers seem a little excessive for a home setup especially for the uec front-end? i don't get the dual-core suggestion for the front-end.

1 1/2. shouldn't the numbers be a little more clear like "X mb ram per concurrent vms running" or "X ghz processing speed for X amount of nodes or controllers in the cloud"?

Server A: clc/ws3/cc/sc Server B: ws3/cc/sc/nc Server C: nc as there can only be 1 clc according the glossary https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UEC/Glossary, i can still have a stable cloud if Server's B or C go down. But what happens when Server A goes down?

1. assuming i have a setup of:

Hmm I'm also involved in a setup at home right now I've just used a dual core with two gigs of ram and a hex core with eight gigs for the vt nc its just that I'm having trouble with the network setup.

possnfiffer said: Hmm I'm also involved in a setup at home right now I've just used a dual core with two gigs of ram and a hex core with eight gigs for the vt nc its just that I'm having trouble with the network setup.

subnetting was always my worst subject. 6-core with 8gb node. that's alot of vm's.

Hi!

High availability for CLC is not supported out of the box. However if that interests you it has been done, check out http://www.roaksoax.com/2010/10/high-availability-uec-clc-howto

kim0 said: Hi!

High availability for CLC is not supported out of the box. However if that interests you it has been done, check out http://www.roaksoax.com/2010/10/high-availability-uec-clc-howto

thanks alot. that's exactly what i needed. after reading the link, it seems like a 3 server system wouldn't be enough - but 4 is. that seems like overkill for a home environment.

this guy http://www.roaksoax.com/2010/10/my-first-uec-deployment/comment-page-1#comment-1913 actually used vm's (kvm) to build his cloud. Depending on performance, this may be the perfect setup with a minimum of 2 physical systems to set up the cloud.

another alternative i just thought of would be to use lxc instead of kvm. it would be the same 2 system requirement with less the load (i think). the only thing about that is my knowledge of lxc is very limited. i would have no idea on how i would create "virtual block devices" to install the controllers/nodes on. but i'm sure anything's possible.

Note that in your case .. serverA and serverB can be merged into one box! so I think your 3 boxes can be enough, even if you want HA CLC, and one NC

kim0 said: Note that in your case .. serverA and serverB can be merged into one box! so I think your 3 boxes can be enough, even if you want HA CLC, and one NC

i'm not sure what kind of benefit i'd get merging A and B into one box. if i have a hardware failure, there goes my cloud, right? or am i missing something?

EDIT: or if a natural disaster hit that box; same deal.

on another note, sticking with a 2 physical server ha clc, it would seem like striping the disks (2 or more disks per system) would increase performance without sacrificing stability. the one problem i see with that is if there is a disk failure on one of the machines, i'd still have my cloud up but i'd have to rebuild the entire machine.