Towards Automatic Management and Live Migration of Virtual - DUO

107 Pages·2007·0.69 MB·English

UNIVERSITY OF OSLO
Department of Informatics
Towards Automatic
Management and Live
Migration of Virtual
Machines
Master Thesis
Ingard Mev˚ag
Oslo University College
May 23, 2007
Towards Automatic Management and Live
Migration of Virtual Machines
Ingard Meva˚g
Oslo University College
May 23, 2007
II
Abstract
This project will concider management of a Xen-based virtual infrastructure
in several aspects. First, management of the infrastructure itself with config-
uration and provisioning of virtual machines, followed by a proof-of-concept
model for dynamic resource sharing for the virtual machines using the newly
introduced Xen-API for resource consumption monitoring. Experiments will
document the feasibility of such a model, using both single, independent vir-
tual machines and various size private networks connected by local bridge de-
vices. Two applications, XeniNFO for resource consumption monitoring and
XenGuard for load balancing of the virtual infrastructure using live migration,
have been developed. XenGuard, which utilizes the features of XeniNFO, has
been merged with the open source virtual machine management tool MLN
(Manage Large Networks) and will be publicly available in a future release
of MLN while XeniNFO has been contributed to XenSource and is publicly
available from the Xen-Unstable repository.
IV
Acknowledgements
First of all I would like to extend my utmost gratitude to my project advisor,
Assoc. Professor Ha˚rek Haugerud. Thank you for your time, effort, our nu-
merous discussions about everything, related and unrelated and last but not
least for keeping my spirits up.
Kyrre Begnum deserves equal gratitude. Thank you for being an ever in-
spiring person, coming up with the project idea, showing great interest in my
progress and for general, much valued, conversations and input on just about
everything regarding this project work. Also, much appreciated was your
help and effort on rewriting and adopting MLN to suit this project’s needs. I
hope we will have the opportunity to extend the cooperation and make MLN-
XenGuard an official release in the future.
Thanks to Alexander Andersen for fruitfull discussions, text editing aid,
being a worth tabletennis opponent and for being my number 1 competitor in
our struggle to achieve good grades throughout our time in the OUCNetwork
and System Administration masters program. To Edson Ochoa for being my
partner in crime for the last five year here at OUC as well as also being a wor-
thy tabletennis opponent. To the rest of my classmates, thank you for many
good times at ”kroa” and other social events.
Thank youmom and dad, formotivating talks, freemeals and proof-reading
help.
Finally i would like to thank my friends, Asle Nødtvedt, Eskil Kristiansen,
Alf Marius Foss Olsen, Yngve Tetlivold, Vegard Hamnes, Christian Fossmo
and everyone else i have forgotten for believing in me, continuous support,
keeping my spirits up and being good friends throughout the duration of this
work.
Once again, Thank you all!
Oslo University College, May 2007
Ingard Meva˚g
V
VI
Contents
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2 Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Configuration and change management for virtual- machines
and infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.4 Open source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.5 Automated load balancing for a virtual infrastructure based on
resource consumption statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.6 Thesis outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2 Background 9
2.1 The dawn of virtualization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2 What is Virtualization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.2.1 Common techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2.1.1 Full virtualization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.2.1.2 Paravirtualization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.3 The main contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.3.1 VMware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.3.2 Xen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.4 Hardware development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.4.1 IBM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.4.2 Others . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
2.5 Achievements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.5.1 Redundancy - Towards less downtime . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.5.2 Reduced cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.5.3 Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.5.4 Server migration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.6 Overhead and performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.7 Resource utilization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.8 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3 Methodology 21
3.1 Equipment and Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.1.1 ATA over Ethernet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
VII
CONTENTS
3.1.2 Logical Volume Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.2 Testbed setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.2.1 SAN setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.3 Xen API . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.4 MLN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4 Software development 37
4.1 XeniNFO - A Xen API example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.2 MLN Xenguard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
5 Measurements and results 43
5.1 Building a MLN project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.1.1 Independent virtual machines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
5.1.2 Private networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.2 Automated live migration with Xenguard . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
5.3 Chunk migration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
5.4 Chunk complexity VS Network reconnection time . . . . . . . . 67
5.4.1 pingtest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
6 Discussion and Conclusion 71
6.1 Technical challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
6.2 Remote Storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
6.3 Virtual Infrastructure Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
6.4 Contributing to Open Source development . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
6.5 Hypervisor interaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
6.6 Software development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
6.6.1 Xen-API documentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
6.6.2 Programming language selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
6.6.3 XML-RPC module selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
6.7 XenGuard analysis and lab results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
6.8 Xenguard and High Availability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
6.9 Future work and further development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
6.10 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
A Appendix I
A.1 Source Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I
A.1.1 XeniNFO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I
A.1.2 MLN Xenguard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I
A.2 Configuration files . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I
A.2.1 MLN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I
A.2.1.1 Project Simple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I
A.2.1.2 Project ftX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III
VIII