[OpenAFS] Afs User volume servers in VM's

Booker Bense bbense@slac.stanford.edu
Wed, 26 Oct 2011 07:34:04 -0700 (PDT)

I am sure I'm far from the first person to think of this and 
there are some threads on the list about it. But has anyone
gone to the logical conclusion for user volumes and done
one VM , one server per user home volume ?

A batch system of any reasonable size is pretty much a built in
denial of service attack for the current OpenAFS implementation.
We work around this by user education and having a "jail server"
where we move user volumes that are getting hammered. But this
requires a lot of monitoring and admin shuffling, and badly 
affects the user perception of AFS as a service.

Ideally, you'd like one mini-server per user volume and at least 
the user would only shoot himself in the foot. I don't think this 
is particularly practical even with current VM's, but how far can 
you push it? And in particular when one VM goes south how does 
that affect the rest of the VM's on the machine?

- Booker C. Bense