Hardware Config

I run it that way in production here, I also happen to have a copy of the machine that I use for testing major changes, etc…

I did not that 3.4 and 3.6 where horribly slow for us, but it turned out to be a fault of the way that those revisions used the PostgreSQL backend, not RT or the system, 3.8.2 is screaming along for us.

Cass-----Original Message-----
From: rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com [mailto:rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com] On Behalf Of Tim Cutts
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2009 1:56 PM
To: RT Users
Subject: Re: [rt-users] Hardware Config

I’ve been following this discussion (rather belatedly) with some interest. One thing I haven’t heard anyone discuss yet:

Has anyone tried running RT in a virtual machine? I’m about to move our RT 3.4.2 server onto a virtual machine. I’ve configured the RT VM to be actually really quite weedy (32-bit and only 2 GB RAM), and perhaps I need to change that, but I figure that VMware ESX probably does quite a good job of caching the disk its using anyway. The actual physical hardware is a quad socket quad core machine with 64 GB of RAM. The underlying storage is StorageWorks EVA on a SAN, so it should be pretty quick.

Has anyone tried this sort of thing? Am I about to burn myself badly? Our turnover of tickets is pretty low - only a few hundred tickets a week.

Tim

The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute is operated by Genome Research Limited, a charity registered in England with number 1021457 and a company registered in England with number 2742969, whose registered office is 215 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BE.
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sales@bestpractical.com

Discover RT’s hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com

Barracuda Networks makes the best spam firewalls and web filters. www.barracudanetworks.com

Has anyone tried running RT in a virtual machine?

yes, we also have a ready to run virtual appliance,
See http://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/RT_Request_Tracker

But this virtual appliance runs on Proxmox VE (means OpenVZ is used as virtualization technology).

I am working also with vmware since years (and also other virtualizations technologies) and the biggest issue is IO performance.
We prefer OpenVZ for database intensive servers like RT as we have NO virtual disks here you get the best performance.

On VMWare, you got virtual disks which costs performance. So if you want to go for VMware, I suggest you invest some money in a fast SAN.
(Or, if you want to try fast and cost effective virtualization - try Proxmox VE)

Just to mention:
you can also install Proxmox VE inside your VMware and use the virtual appliance - then RT performs similar as you install it “by hand” in your VMWare environment.

Best Regards,

Martin Maurer

martin@proxmox.com
http://pve.proxmox.com

Martin Maurer wrote:

Has anyone tried running RT in a virtual machine?

yes, we also have a ready to run virtual appliance,
See http://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/RT_Request_Tracker

I am working also with vmware since years (and also other virtualizations technologies) and the biggest issue is IO performance.
We prefer OpenVZ for database intensive servers like RT as we have NO virtual disks here you get the best performance.

On VMWare, you got virtual disks which costs performance. So if you want to go for VMware, I suggest you invest some money in a fast SAN.
(Or, if you want to try fast and cost effective virtualization - try Proxmox VE)

Just to mention:
you can also install Proxmox VE inside your VMware and use the virtual appliance - then RT performs similar as you install it “by hand” in your VMWare environment.

I don’t know about anyone else, but I am getting a little uncomfortable
with your posts (to RT-Users and to the Wiki) being little more than an
advert for proxmox rather than a real contribution to the community.

I’m not saying I don’t want you mentioning it, but I personally would
appreciate it if you could tone down the advertising.
Kind Regards,

Mike Peachey, IT
Tel: +44 114 281 2655
Fax: +44 114 281 2951
Jennic Ltd, Furnival Street, Sheffield, S1 4QT, UK
Comp Reg No: 3191371 - Registered In England
http://www.jennic.com

Mike Peachey schrieb:

Martin Maurer wrote:

Has anyone tried running RT in a virtual machine?

yes, we also have a ready to run virtual appliance,
See http://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/RT_Request_Tracker

I am working also with vmware since years (and also other virtualizations technologies) and the biggest issue is IO performance.
We prefer OpenVZ for database intensive servers like RT as we have NO virtual disks here you get the best performance.

On VMWare, you got virtual disks which costs performance. So if you want to go for VMware, I suggest you invest some money in a fast SAN.
(Or, if you want to try fast and cost effective virtualization - try Proxmox VE)

Just to mention:
you can also install Proxmox VE inside your VMware and use the virtual appliance - then RT performs similar as you install it “by hand” in your VMWare environment.

I don’t know about anyone else, but I am getting a little uncomfortable
with your posts (to RT-Users and to the Wiki) being little more than an
advert for proxmox rather than a real contribution to the community.

Well, it’s a fine line…

I’m not saying I don’t want you mentioning it, but I personally would
appreciate it if you could tone down the advertising.

Personally, I don’t mind. But I know that you can get carried away if
you have built something and it works…
I do use Virtuozzo (the commercial version of OpenVZ), but I’m not sure
I would trust it with RT :wink:
OTOH, it’s mostly because I like the way perl-stuff is handled in FreeBSD.

Rainer

I don’t know about anyone else, but I am getting a little uncomfortable
with your posts (to RT-Users and to the Wiki) being little more than an
advert for proxmox rather than a real contribution to the community.

Hi Mike,

Someone asked about experiences from others, I posted mine - I am working with VMware products for years and I also built certified appliances for VMware ESX (with Postgres databases inside). So I just thought I will share my personal experience here.

“Real” contributions to the RT community:

I think our RT appliance is a quite real contribution. Just to mention, we published the appliance and also the way we build it (with dab, GPL licensed).
Proxmox VE is GPL, also the RT appliance. So all I mentioned are GPL products - available for free for everyone.

FYI: we discussed this with bestpractical and they liked it.

I’m not saying I don’t want you mentioning it, but I personally would
appreciate it if you could tone down the advertising.

I post my experience with RT and virtualization and the way we work at Proxmox. If you are interested - read it. If not, just ignore it.
But if you feel still uncomfortable, maybe I can give you more information to let you feel better :-)?

BTW, quite a lot downloaded our RT appliance and there are already some system in productions - increasing the RT community - so we can’t be that wrong.

Br, Martin
http://pve.proxmox.com

Martin Maurer wrote:

I don’t know about anyone else, but I am getting a little uncomfortable
with your posts (to RT-Users and to the Wiki) being little more than an
advert for proxmox rather than a real contribution to the community.

Hi Mike,

As I said, I just thought it needed toning down a little.
  1. RT-Users
    The question was “Anyone use RT virtualised?”.
    Your answer was “Yes, we do it in Proxmox, and by the way here are the
    reasons why proxmox is better than other virtualisation products” rather
    than “yes, we do it in Proxmox, here’s some info about running RT in
    proxmox”

  2. The wiki
    When proxmox was added to the installation instructions page, rather
    than adding an appropriate entry for proxmox in the specifics section
    (as it is now) or below, it was added at the very top in its own section
    so a paraphrased version of the page looked like this:
    Installation Instructions:

  3. Proxmox

  4. Source

  5. Platform-Specific

I see no problem whatsoever in putting a link to proxmox installation
instructions on that page, in fact it’s THE place to put it, but I found
making it the number one entry on the page in that way distasteful.

I by no means want to discourage people from using proxmox, I don’t want
to discourage you from recommending it to people as an option, I don’t
even wish to suggest your contributions to the community are anything
less than angelic.

I just thought that the way you were advertising it was very overbearing
and appeared intensely commercial.

Kind Regards,

Mike Peachey, IT
Tel: +44 114 281 2655
Fax: +44 114 281 2951
Jennic Ltd, Furnival Street, Sheffield, S1 4QT, UK
Comp Reg No: 3191371 - Registered In England
http://www.jennic.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Peachey [mailto:mike.peachey@jennic.com]
Sent: Dienstag, 10. Februar 2009 12:29
To: Martin Maurer
Cc: Tim Cutts; RT Users
Subject: Re: [rt-users] Hardware Config

Martin Maurer wrote:

I don’t know about anyone else, but I am getting a little
uncomfortable

with your posts (to RT-Users and to the Wiki) being little more than
an

advert for proxmox rather than a real contribution to the community.

Hi Mike,

As I said, I just thought it needed toning down a little.
  1. RT-Users
    The question was “Anyone use RT virtualised?”.
    Your answer was “Yes, we do it in Proxmox, and by the way here are the
    reasons why proxmox is better than other virtualisation products” rather
    than “yes, we do it in Proxmox, here’s some info about running RT in
    proxmox”

Hi Mike,

My personal experience here:

I did intense tests on RT and especially Postgres DB on: VMware (server 1.x, server 2.x, esx 3 and esx 3.5, citrix xen5, openvz, kvm)

The summary of all these test is IO performance, especially disk access and fsync/sec. I tested all on local storage (xeon server, fast hardware raid with fast cache enabled).
So if you run database intensive application a significant performance loss as soon as it goes to virtualized disks.

As OS virtualization does not use virtualized disks, it much better in this discipline.

Another important point I got: if you run more VM (with virtual disks) on the same host the IO performance goes faster down compared to a system where ONE Linux Kernel is doing the IO access.

Overview OS virtualization technologies:

I highly recommend to go for a fast SAN if you use VMWare (also VMWare suggests this).

  1. The wiki
    When proxmox was added to the installation instructions page, rather
    than adding an appropriate entry for proxmox in the specifics section
    (as it is now) or below, it was added at the very top in its own section
    so a paraphrased version of the page looked like this:
    Installation Instructions:
  2. Proxmox
  3. Source
  4. Platform-Specific

I see no problem whatsoever in putting a link to proxmox installation
instructions on that page, in fact it’s THE place to put it, but I found
making it the number one entry on the page in that way distasteful.

Sorry, looks like you got only the half story here. I was asked by Jesse from bestpractical to put this information on the wiki pages. As the wiki software and the navigation structure is very bad and I found no info where to place it I wrote the info on top AND then I informed/asked bestpractial to review it and asked to move to the right place - and someone moved it to the right place within days. Looks that you misunderstood this.

I by no means want to discourage people from using proxmox, I don’t want
to discourage you from recommending it to people as an option, I don’t
even wish to suggest your contributions to the community are anything
less than angelic.

I just thought that the way you were advertising it was very overbearing
and appeared intensely commercial.

I hope I cleared everything: but why are you talking about commercial interests here? The appliance is not commercial, its free and GPL.
Lets go back to RT issues, sorry for writing non RT stuff to this list but I just want to clear this.

Br, Martin