0

I am running XenServer 6.5 and I just configured High Availability. I noticed that there is the option for start order. Is there a best practice for start order when it comes to HA?

Obviously the more important VM's should be started first, but is there any harm in having all VM's with a start order of 0?

Should I set them all in incremental order for the start order:

  • VM1 - 0,
  • VM2 - 1,
  • VM3 - 2,
  • etc.

Is it okay to have a few with start order 0, a few with 1, 2, etc.?

Also, are there any recommendations when it comes to setting the 'Attempt to start vm after xxx seconds' options?

I imagine it makes sense to have a few seconds between each VM restart but want to see what is other's opinion.

рüффп
  • 620
  • 1
  • 11
  • 24
jrd1989
  • 628
  • 10
  • 35

1 Answers1

1

You've got the right idea, start the important VMs you want first. Keep in mind, though, if HA is triggering you may have lost capacity. If you are down on capacity, do you want to start every single VM? You might be OK to do so, if the number of machines you have is small, but if you lost say, 2 servers in a 3 server pool, you may not want to start everything up immediately. Once you have the important stuff up and running on a pool of reduced size, you can see what resources you have available and spin up the rest.

I'd say, figure out what you really want to see powered up first, prioritize those accordingly. If something needs to be booted in a particular order, set it that way.

I'd also suggest staggering the startup. When a VM starts up, it can peg the CPU and disk while its loading everything up. If you have every VM trying to start at the same time, you could see them all take a lot longer to complete their boot process.

Censored P. Censored
  • 270
  • 1
  • 5