cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chip Childers <chip.child...@sungard.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS]S3-based secondary storage
Date Wed, 02 Jan 2013 22:00:21 GMT
On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Hari Kannan <hari.kannan@citrix.com> wrote:
> Hi Chip,
>
> As I understand, 509 "backs" the NFS secondary storage using a S3 compatible Object Store.
I'm proposing that CS uses any S3 ased Object Store as the "main" secondary storage (I want
to avoid using the word primary in this context..) - in that sense, it is similar to the Swift
use case (which uses NFS as a temporary staging) - I don't know if that (NFS as a temporary
staging is strictly required also? Plus, I want to have a single object store for the entire
region, across multiple zones (it doesn't appear 509 can do that)
>
> Simply put, 509 is about "backing NFS secondary storage with an S3-compatible object
store" - my proposal is about having an S3 compatible object store as THE secondary storage
>

Clear distinction.  Thanks for elaborating.

> Hari
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 2, 2013 7:56 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]S3-based secondary storage
>
> Isn't this a duplicate of CLOUDSTACK-509?  Can we close CLOUDSTACK-714?
>
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 5:51 PM, Hari Kannan <hari.kannan@citrix.com> wrote:
>> 714
>

Mime
View raw message