cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mike Tutkowski <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com>
Subject Re: Managed storage with KVM
Date Wed, 18 Sep 2013 04:49:47 GMT
For what it's worth, OpenStack is quite a bit different.

All storage volumes are dynamically created (like what was enabled in 4.2)
and these volumes are directly attached to VMs (without going through the
hypervisor).

Since we go through the hypervisor, to enable a 1:1 mapping between a CS
volume and a SAN LUN required - for XenServer - the creation of an SR with
one VDI that took up as much space in the SR as it could.

Same idea with ESX(i), but - as we chatted about a bit - it's one datastore
having a VMDK file that took up as much space in the datastore as it could.

That's why - initially - I was under the impression we'd take the same
approach with KVM.

I'm glad, though, you presented the option about discovering the iSCSI
target and then attaching the resultant device as a raw device to the VM.

Since CS handles HA for KVM, that makes sense (you don't need the
equivalent then of the overhead we incur with an SR or datastore).


On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 10:41 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:

> What you're saying here is definitely something we should talk about.
>
> Hopefully my previous e-mail has clarified how this works a bit.
>
> It mainly comes down to this:
>
> For the first time in CS history, primary storage is no longer required to
> be preallocated by the admin and then handed to CS. CS volumes don't have
> to share a preallocated volume anymore.
>
> As of 4.2, primary storage can be based on a SAN (or some other storage
> device). You can tell CS how many bytes and IOPS to use from this storage
> device and CS invokes the appropriate plug-in to carve out LUNs dynamically.
>
> Each LUN is home to one and only one data disk. Data disks - in this model
> - never share a LUN.
>
> The main use case for this is so a CS volume can deliver guaranteed IOPS
> if the storage device (ex. SolidFire SAN) delivers guaranteed IOPS on a
> LUN-by-LUN basis.
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 10:16 PM, Marcus Sorensen <shadowsor@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> I guess whether or not a solidfire device is capable of hosting
>> multiple disk pools is irrelevant, we'd hope that we could get the
>> stats (maybe 30TB availabie, and 15TB allocated in LUNs). But if these
>> stats aren't collected, I can't as an admin define multiple pools and
>> expect cloudstack to allocate evenly from them or fill one up and move
>> to the next, because it doesn't know how big it is.
>>
>> Ultimately this discussion has nothing to do with the KVM stuff
>> itself, just a tangent, but something to think about.
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 10:13 PM, Marcus Sorensen <shadowsor@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Ok, on most storage pools it shows how many GB free/used when listing
>> > the pool both via API and in the UI. I'm guessing those are empty then
>> > for the solid fire storage, but it seems like the user should have to
>> > define some sort of pool that the luns get carved out of, and you
>> > should be able to get the stats for that, right? Or is a solid fire
>> > appliance only one pool per appliance? This isn't about billing, but
>> > just so cloudstack itself knows whether or not there is space left on
>> > the storage device, so cloudstack can go on allocating from a
>> > different primary storage as this one fills up. There are also
>> > notifications and things. It seems like there should be a call you can
>> > handle for this, maybe Edison knows.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 8:46 PM, Marcus Sorensen <shadowsor@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> You respond to more than attach and detach, right? Don't you create
>> luns as
>> >> well? Or are you just referring to the hypervisor stuff?
>> >>
>> >> On Sep 17, 2013 7:51 PM, "Mike Tutkowski" <
>> mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Hi Marcus,
>> >>>
>> >>> I never need to respond to a CreateStoragePool call for either
>> XenServer
>> >>> or
>> >>> VMware.
>> >>>
>> >>> What happens is I respond only to the Attach- and Detach-volume
>> commands.
>> >>>
>> >>> Let's say an attach comes in:
>> >>>
>> >>> In this case, I check to see if the storage is "managed." Talking
>> >>> XenServer
>> >>> here, if it is, I log in to the LUN that is the disk we want to
>> attach.
>> >>> After, if this is the first time attaching this disk, I create an SR
>> and a
>> >>> VDI within the SR. If it is not the first time attaching this disk,
>> the
>> >>> LUN
>> >>> already has the SR and VDI on it.
>> >>>
>> >>> Once this is done, I let the normal "attach" logic run because this
>> logic
>> >>> expected an SR and a VDI and now it has it.
>> >>>
>> >>> It's the same thing for VMware: Just substitute datastore for SR and
>> VMDK
>> >>> for VDI.
>> >>>
>> >>> Does that make sense?
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks!
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 7:34 PM, Marcus Sorensen
>> >>> <shadowsor@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> > What do you do with Xen? I imagine the user enter the SAN details
>> when
>> >>> > registering the pool? A the pool details are basically just
>> instructions
>> >>> > on
>> >>> > how to log into a target, correct?
>> >>> >
>> >>> > You can choose to log in a KVM host to the target during
>> >>> > createStoragePool
>> >>> > and save the pool in a map, or just save the pool info in a map for
>> >>> > future
>> >>> > reference by uuid, for when you do need to log in. The
>> createStoragePool
>> >>> > then just becomes a way to save the pool info to the agent.
>> Personally,
>> >>> > I'd
>> >>> > log in on the pool create and look/scan for specific luns when
>> they're
>> >>> > needed, but I haven't thought it through thoroughly. I just say that
>> >>> > mainly
>> >>> > because login only happens once, the first time the pool is used,
>> and
>> >>> > every
>> >>> > other storage command is about discovering new luns or maybe
>> >>> > deleting/disconnecting luns no longer needed. On the other hand, you
>> >>> > could
>> >>> > do all of the above: log in on pool create, then also check if
>> you're
>> >>> > logged in on other commands and log in if you've lost connection.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > With Xen, what does your registered pool   show in the UI for
>> avail/used
>> >>> > capacity, and how does it get that info? I assume there is some
>> sort of
>> >>> > disk pool that the luns are carved from, and that your plugin is
>> called
>> >>> > to
>> >>> > talk to the SAN and expose to the user how much of that pool has
>> been
>> >>> > allocated. Knowing how you already solves these problems with Xen
>> will
>> >>> > help
>> >>> > figure out what to do with KVM.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > If this is the case, I think the plugin can continue to handle it
>> rather
>> >>> > than getting details from the agent. I'm not sure if that means
>> nulls
>> >>> > are
>> >>> > OK for these on the agent side or what, I need to look at the
>> storage
>> >>> > plugin arch more closely.
>> >>> > On Sep 17, 2013 7:08 PM, "Mike Tutkowski" <
>> mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com>
>> >>> > wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > > Hey Marcus,
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > I'm reviewing your e-mails as I implement the necessary methods
>> in new
>> >>> > > classes.
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > "So, referencing StorageAdaptor.java, createStoragePool accepts
>> all of
>> >>> > > the pool data (host, port, name, path) which would be used to log
>> the
>> >>> > > host into the initiator."
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Can you tell me, in my case, since a storage pool (primary
>> storage) is
>> >>> > > actually the SAN, I wouldn't really be logging into anything at
>> this
>> >>> > point,
>> >>> > > correct?
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Also, what kind of capacity, available, and used bytes make sense
>> to
>> >>> > report
>> >>> > > for KVMStoragePool (since KVMStoragePool represents the SAN in my
>> case
>> >>> > and
>> >>> > > not an individual LUN)?
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Thanks!
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:42 PM, Marcus Sorensen <
>> shadowsor@gmail.com
>> >>> > > >wrote:
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > > Ok, KVM will be close to that, of course, because only the
>> >>> > > > hypervisor
>> >>> > > > classes differ, the rest is all mgmt server. Creating a volume
>> is
>> >>> > > > just
>> >>> > > > a db entry until it's deployed for the first time.
>> >>> > > > AttachVolumeCommand
>> >>> > > > on the agent side (LibvirtStorageAdaptor.java is analogous to
>> >>> > > > CitrixResourceBase.java) will do the iscsiadm commands (via a
>> KVM
>> >>> > > > StorageAdaptor) to log in the host to the target and then you
>> have a
>> >>> > > > block device.  Maybe libvirt will do that for you, but my quick
>> read
>> >>> > > > made it sound like the iscsi libvirt pool type is actually a
>> pool,
>> >>> > > > not
>> >>> > > > a lun or volume, so you'll need to figure out if that works or
>> if
>> >>> > > > you'll have to use iscsiadm commands.
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > > If you're NOT going to use LibvirtStorageAdaptor (because
>> Libvirt
>> >>> > > > doesn't really manage your pool the way you want), you're going
>> to
>> >>> > > > have to create a version of KVMStoragePool class and a
>> >>> > > > StorageAdaptor
>> >>> > > > class (see LibvirtStoragePool.java and
>> LibvirtStorageAdaptor.java),
>> >>> > > > implementing all of the methods, then in KVMStorageManager.java
>> >>> > > > there's a "_storageMapper" map. This is used to select the
>> correct
>> >>> > > > adaptor, you can see in this file that every call first pulls
>> the
>> >>> > > > correct adaptor out of this map via getStorageAdaptor. So you
>> can
>> >>> > > > see
>> >>> > > > a comment in this file that says "add other storage adaptors
>> here",
>> >>> > > > where it puts to this map, this is where you'd register your
>> >>> > > > adaptor.
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > > So, referencing StorageAdaptor.java, createStoragePool accepts
>> all
>> >>> > > > of
>> >>> > > > the pool data (host, port, name, path) which would be used to
>> log
>> >>> > > > the
>> >>> > > > host into the initiator. I *believe* the method getPhysicalDisk
>> will
>> >>> > > > need to do the work of attaching the lun.  AttachVolumeCommand
>> calls
>> >>> > > > this and then creates the XML diskdef and attaches it to the VM.
>> >>> > > > Now,
>> >>> > > > one thing you need to know is that createStoragePool is called
>> >>> > > > often,
>> >>> > > > sometimes just to make sure the pool is there. You may want to
>> >>> > > > create
>> >>> > > > a map in your adaptor class and keep track of pools that have
>> been
>> >>> > > > created, LibvirtStorageAdaptor doesn't have to do this because
>> it
>> >>> > > > asks
>> >>> > > > libvirt about which storage pools exist. There are also calls to
>> >>> > > > refresh the pool stats, and all of the other calls can be seen
>> in
>> >>> > > > the
>> >>> > > > StorageAdaptor as well. There's a createPhysical disk, clone,
>> etc,
>> >>> > > > but
>> >>> > > > it's probably a hold-over from 4.1, as I have the vague idea
>> that
>> >>> > > > volumes are created on the mgmt server via the plugin now, so
>> >>> > > > whatever
>> >>> > > > doesn't apply can just be stubbed out (or optionally
>> >>> > > > extended/reimplemented here, if you don't mind the hosts
>> talking to
>> >>> > > > the san api).
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > > There is a difference between attaching new volumes and
>> launching a
>> >>> > > > VM
>> >>> > > > with existing volumes.  In the latter case, the VM definition
>> that
>> >>> > > > was
>> >>> > > > passed to the KVM agent includes the disks, (StartCommand).
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > > I'd be interested in how your pool is defined for Xen, I
>> imagine it
>> >>> > > > would need to be kept the same. Is it just a definition to the
>> SAN
>> >>> > > > (ip address or some such, port number) and perhaps a volume pool
>> >>> > > > name?
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > > > If there is a way for me to update the ACL list on the SAN to
>> have
>> >>> > > only a
>> >>> > > > > single KVM host have access to the volume, that would be
>> ideal.
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > > That depends on your SAN API.  I was under the impression that
>> the
>> >>> > > > storage plugin framework allowed for acls, or for you to do
>> whatever
>> >>> > > > you want for create/attach/delete/snapshot, etc. You'd just call
>> >>> > > > your
>> >>> > > > SAN API with the host info for the ACLs prior to when the disk
>> is
>> >>> > > > attached (or the VM is started).  I'd have to look more at the
>> >>> > > > framework to know the details, in 4.1 I would do this in
>> >>> > > > getPhysicalDisk just prior to connecting up the LUN.
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 10:27 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> > > > <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >>> > > > > OK, yeah, the ACL part will be interesting. That is a bit
>> >>> > > > > different
>> >>> > > from
>> >>> > > > how
>> >>> > > > > it works with XenServer and VMware.
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > > Just to give you an idea how it works in 4.2 with XenServer:
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > > * The user creates a CS volume (this is just recorded in the
>> >>> > > > cloud.volumes
>> >>> > > > > table).
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > > * The user attaches the volume as a disk to a VM for the first
>> >>> > > > > time
>> >>> > (if
>> >>> > > > the
>> >>> > > > > storage allocator picks the SolidFire plug-in, the storage
>> >>> > > > > framework
>> >>> > > > invokes
>> >>> > > > > a method on the plug-in that creates a volume on the
>> SAN...info
>> >>> > > > > like
>> >>> > > the
>> >>> > > > IQN
>> >>> > > > > of the SAN volume is recorded in the DB).
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > > * CitrixResourceBase's execute(AttachVolumeCommand) is
>> executed.
>> >>> > > > > It
>> >>> > > > > determines based on a flag passed in that the storage in
>> question
>> >>> > > > > is
>> >>> > > > > "CloudStack-managed" storage (as opposed to "traditional"
>> >>> > preallocated
>> >>> > > > > storage). This tells it to discover the iSCSI target. Once
>> >>> > > > > discovered
>> >>> > > it
>> >>> > > > > determines if the iSCSI target already contains a storage
>> >>> > > > > repository
>> >>> > > (it
>> >>> > > > > would if this were a re-attach situation). If it does contain
>> an
>> >>> > > > > SR
>> >>> > > > already,
>> >>> > > > > then there should already be one VDI, as well. If there is no
>> SR,
>> >>> > > > > an
>> >>> > SR
>> >>> > > > is
>> >>> > > > > created and a single VDI is created within it (that takes up
>> about
>> >>> > > > > as
>> >>> > > > much
>> >>> > > > > space as was requested for the CloudStack volume).
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > > * The normal attach-volume logic continues (it depends on the
>> >>> > existence
>> >>> > > > of
>> >>> > > > > an SR and a VDI).
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > > The VMware case is essentially the same (mainly just
>> substitute
>> >>> > > datastore
>> >>> > > > > for SR and VMDK for VDI).
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > > In both cases, all hosts in the cluster have discovered the
>> iSCSI
>> >>> > > target,
>> >>> > > > > but only the host that is currently running the VM that is
>> using
>> >>> > > > > the
>> >>> > > VDI
>> >>> > > > (or
>> >>> > > > > VMKD) is actually using the disk.
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > > Live Migration should be OK because the hypervisors
>> communicate
>> >>> > > > > with
>> >>> > > > > whatever metadata they have on the SR (or datastore).
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > > I see what you're saying with KVM, though.
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > > In that case, the hosts are clustered only in CloudStack's
>> eyes.
>> >>> > > > > CS
>> >>> > > > controls
>> >>> > > > > Live Migration. You don't really need a clustered filesystem
>> on
>> >>> > > > > the
>> >>> > > LUN.
>> >>> > > > The
>> >>> > > > > LUN could be handed over raw to the VM using it.
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > > If there is a way for me to update the ACL list on the SAN to
>> have
>> >>> > > only a
>> >>> > > > > single KVM host have access to the volume, that would be
>> ideal.
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > > Also, I agree I'll need to use iscsiadm to discover and log
>> in to
>> >>> > > > > the
>> >>> > > > iSCSI
>> >>> > > > > target. I'll also need to take the resultant new device and
>> pass
>> >>> > > > > it
>> >>> > > into
>> >>> > > > the
>> >>> > > > > VM.
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > > Does this sound reasonable? Please call me out on anything I
>> seem
>> >>> > > > incorrect
>> >>> > > > > about. :)
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > > Thanks for all the thought on this, Marcus!
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Marcus Sorensen <
>> >>> > shadowsor@gmail.com>
>> >>> > > > > wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>
>> >>> > > > >> Perfect. You'll have a domain def ( the VM), a disk def, and
>> the
>> >>> > > attach
>> >>> > > > >> the disk def to the vm. You may need to do your own
>> >>> > > > >> StorageAdaptor
>> >>> > and
>> >>> > > > run
>> >>> > > > >> iscsiadm commands to accomplish that, depending on how the
>> >>> > > > >> libvirt
>> >>> > > iscsi
>> >>> > > > >> works. My impression is that a 1:1:1 pool/lun/volume isn't
>> how it
>> >>> > > works
>> >>> > > > on
>> >>> > > > >> xen at the momen., nor is it ideal.
>> >>> > > > >>
>> >>> > > > >> Your plugin will handle acls as far as which host can see
>> which
>> >>> > > > >> luns
>> >>> > > as
>> >>> > > > >> well, I remember discussing that months ago, so that a disk
>> won't
>> >>> > > > >> be
>> >>> > > > >> connected until the hypervisor has exclusive access, so it
>> will
>> >>> > > > >> be
>> >>> > > safe
>> >>> > > > and
>> >>> > > > >> fence the disk from rogue nodes that cloudstack loses
>> >>> > > > >> connectivity
>> >>> > > > with. It
>> >>> > > > >> should revoke access to everything but the target host...
>> Except
>> >>> > > > >> for
>> >>> > > > during
>> >>> > > > >> migration but we can discuss that later, there's a migration
>> prep
>> >>> > > > process
>> >>> > > > >> where the new host can be added to the acls, and the old
>> host can
>> >>> > > > >> be
>> >>> > > > removed
>> >>> > > > >> post migration.
>> >>> > > > >>
>> >>> > > > >> On Sep 13, 2013 8:16 PM, "Mike Tutkowski" <
>> >>> > > mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > >> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>
>> >>> > > > >>> Yeah, that would be ideal.
>> >>> > > > >>>
>> >>> > > > >>> So, I would still need to discover the iSCSI target, log in
>> to
>> >>> > > > >>> it,
>> >>> > > then
>> >>> > > > >>> figure out what /dev/sdX was created as a result (and leave
>> it
>> >>> > > > >>> as
>> >>> > is
>> >>> > > -
>> >>> > > > do
>> >>> > > > >>> not format it with any file system...clustered or not). I
>> would
>> >>> > pass
>> >>> > > > that
>> >>> > > > >>> device into the VM.
>> >>> > > > >>>
>> >>> > > > >>> Kind of accurate?
>> >>> > > > >>>
>> >>> > > > >>>
>> >>> > > > >>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Marcus Sorensen <
>> >>> > > shadowsor@gmail.com>
>> >>> > > > >>> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>> Look in LibvirtVMDef.java (I think) for the disk
>> definitions.
>> >>> > There
>> >>> > > > are
>> >>> > > > >>>> ones that work for block devices rather than files. You can
>> >>> > > > >>>> piggy
>> >>> > > > back off
>> >>> > > > >>>> of the existing disk definitions and attach it to the vm
>> as a
>> >>> > block
>> >>> > > > device.
>> >>> > > > >>>> The definition is an XML string per libvirt XML format.
>> You may
>> >>> > want
>> >>> > > > to use
>> >>> > > > >>>> an alternate path to the disk rather than just /dev/sdx
>> like I
>> >>> > > > mentioned,
>> >>> > > > >>>> there are by-id paths to the block devices, as well as
>> other
>> >>> > > > >>>> ones
>> >>> > > > that will
>> >>> > > > >>>> be consistent and easier for management, not sure how
>> familiar
>> >>> > > > >>>> you
>> >>> > > > are with
>> >>> > > > >>>> device naming on Linux.
>> >>> > > > >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>> On Sep 13, 2013 8:00 PM, "Marcus Sorensen"
>> >>> > > > >>>> <shadowsor@gmail.com>
>> >>> > > > wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>> No, as that would rely on virtualized network/iscsi
>> initiator
>> >>> > > inside
>> >>> > > > >>>>> the vm, which also sucks. I mean attach /dev/sdx (your
>> lun on
>> >>> > > > hypervisor) as
>> >>> > > > >>>>> a disk to the VM, rather than attaching some image file
>> that
>> >>> > > resides
>> >>> > > > on a
>> >>> > > > >>>>> filesystem, mounted on the host, living on a target.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>> Actually, if you plan on the storage supporting live
>> migration
>> >>> > > > >>>>> I
>> >>> > > > think
>> >>> > > > >>>>> this is the only way. You can't put a filesystem on it and
>> >>> > > > >>>>> mount
>> >>> > it
>> >>> > > > in two
>> >>> > > > >>>>> places to facilitate migration unless its a clustered
>> >>> > > > >>>>> filesystem,
>> >>> > > in
>> >>> > > > which
>> >>> > > > >>>>> case you're back to shared mount point.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>> As far as I'm aware, the xenserver SR style is basically
>> LVM
>> >>> > with a
>> >>> > > > xen
>> >>> > > > >>>>> specific cluster management, a custom CLVM. They don't
>> use a
>> >>> > > > filesystem
>> >>> > > > >>>>> either.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>> On Sep 13, 2013 7:44 PM, "Mike Tutkowski"
>> >>> > > > >>>>> <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>> When you say, "wire up the lun directly to the vm," do
>> you
>> >>> > > > >>>>>> mean
>> >>> > > > >>>>>> circumventing the hypervisor? I didn't think we could do
>> that
>> >>> > > > >>>>>> in
>> >>> > > CS.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>> OpenStack, on the other hand, always circumvents the
>> >>> > > > >>>>>> hypervisor,
>> >>> > > as
>> >>> > > > far as I
>> >>> > > > >>>>>> know.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 7:40 PM, Marcus Sorensen <
>> >>> > > > shadowsor@gmail.com>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>> Better to wire up the lun directly to the vm unless
>> there is
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>> a
>> >>> > > good
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>> reason not to.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>> On Sep 13, 2013 7:40 PM, "Marcus Sorensen" <
>> >>> > shadowsor@gmail.com>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>> You could do that, but as mentioned I think its a
>> mistake
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>> to
>> >>> > go
>> >>> > > to
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>> the trouble of creating a 1:1 mapping of CS volumes to
>> luns
>> >>> > and
>> >>> > > > then putting
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>> a filesystem on it, mounting it, and then putting a
>> QCOW2
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>> or
>> >>> > > even
>> >>> > > > RAW disk
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>> image on that filesystem. You'll lose a lot of iops
>> along
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>> the
>> >>> > > > way, and have
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>> more overhead with the filesystem and its journaling,
>> etc.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>> On Sep 13, 2013 7:33 PM, "Mike Tutkowski"
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>> <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> Ah, OK, I didn't know that was such new ground in KVM
>> with
>> >>> > CS.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> So, the way people use our SAN with KVM and CS today
>> is by
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> selecting SharedMountPoint and specifying the
>> location of
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> the
>> >>> > > > share.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> They can set up their share using Open iSCSI by
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> discovering
>> >>> > > their
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> iSCSI target, logging in to it, then mounting it
>> somewhere
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> on
>> >>> > > > their file
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> system.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> Would it make sense for me to just do that discovery,
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> logging
>> >>> > > in,
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> and mounting behind the scenes for them and letting
>> the
>> >>> > current
>> >>> > > > code manage
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> the rest as it currently does?
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 7:27 PM, Marcus Sorensen
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> <shadowsor@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> Oh, hypervisor snapshots are a bit different. I need
>> to
>> >>> > catch
>> >>> > > up
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> on the work done in KVM, but this is basically just
>> disk
>> >>> > > > snapshots + memory
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> dump. I still think disk snapshots would preferably
>> be
>> >>> > handled
>> >>> > > > by the SAN,
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> and then memory dumps can go to secondary storage or
>> >>> > something
>> >>> > > > else. This is
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> relatively new ground with CS and KVM, so we will
>> want to
>> >>> > see
>> >>> > > > how others are
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> planning theirs.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Sep 13, 2013 7:20 PM, "Marcus Sorensen" <
>> >>> > > shadowsor@gmail.com
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Let me back up and say I don't think you'd use a vdi
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> style
>> >>> > on
>> >>> > > > an
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> iscsi lun. I think you'd want to treat it as a RAW
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> format.
>> >>> > > > Otherwise you're
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> putting a filesystem on your lun, mounting it,
>> creating
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> a
>> >>> > > > QCOW2 disk image,
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> and that seems unnecessary and a performance killer.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> So probably attaching the raw iscsi lun as a disk
>> to the
>> >>> > VM,
>> >>> > > > and
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> handling snapshots on the San side via the storage
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> plugin
>> >>> > is
>> >>> > > > best. My
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> impression from the storage plugin refactor was that
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> there
>> >>> > > was
>> >>> > > > a snapshot
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> service that would allow the San to handle
>> snapshots.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 13, 2013 7:15 PM, "Marcus Sorensen" <
>> >>> > > > shadowsor@gmail.com>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Ideally volume snapshots can be handled by the SAN
>> back
>> >>> > end,
>> >>> > > > if
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the SAN supports it. The cloudstack mgmt server
>> could
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> call
>> >>> > > > your plugin for
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> volume snapshot and it would be hypervisor
>> agnostic. As
>> >>> > far
>> >>> > > > as space, that
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> would depend on how your SAN handles it. With
>> ours, we
>> >>> > carve
>> >>> > > > out luns from a
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> pool, and the snapshot spave comes from the pool
>> and is
>> >>> > > > independent of the
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> LUN size the host sees.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 13, 2013 7:10 PM, "Mike Tutkowski"
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey Marcus,
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I wonder if the iSCSI storage pool type for
>> libvirt
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> won't
>> >>> > > > work
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> when you take into consideration hypervisor
>> snapshots?
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On XenServer, when you take a hypervisor
>> snapshot, the
>> >>> > VDI
>> >>> > > > for
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the snapshot is placed on the same storage
>> repository
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> as
>> >>> > > the
>> >>> > > > volume is on.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Same idea for VMware, I believe.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> So, what would happen in my case (let's say for
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> XenServer
>> >>> > > and
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> VMware for 4.3 because I don't support hypervisor
>> >>> > snapshots
>> >>> > > > in 4.2) is I'd
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> make an iSCSI target that is larger than what the
>> user
>> >>> > > > requested for the
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> CloudStack volume (which is fine because our SAN
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> thinly
>> >>> > > > provisions volumes,
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> so the space is not actually used unless it needs
>> to
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> be).
>> >>> > > > The CloudStack
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> volume would be the only "object" on the SAN
>> volume
>> >>> > until a
>> >>> > > > hypervisor
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> snapshot is taken. This snapshot would also
>> reside on
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>> > > > SAN volume.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> If this is also how KVM behaves and there is no
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> creation
>> >>> > of
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> LUNs within an iSCSI target from libvirt (which,
>> even
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> if
>> >>> > > > there were support
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> for this, our SAN currently only allows one LUN
>> per
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> iSCSI
>> >>> > > > target), then I
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> don't see how using this model will work.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps I will have to go enhance the current way
>> this
>> >>> > > works
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> with DIR?
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you think?
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> That appears to be the way it's used for iSCSI
>> access
>> >>> > > today.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I suppose I could go that route, too, but I
>> might as
>> >>> > well
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> leverage what libvirt has for iSCSI instead.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 6:26 PM, Marcus Sorensen
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <shadowsor@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To your question about SharedMountPoint, I
>> believe
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
>> >>> > > just
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> acts like a
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'DIR' storage type or something similar to
>> that. The
>> >>> > > > end-user
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> responsible for mounting a file system that all
>> KVM
>> >>> > hosts
>> >>> > > > can
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> access,
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and CloudStack is oblivious to what is
>> providing the
>> >>> > > > storage.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It could
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be NFS, or OCFS2, or some other clustered
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> filesystem,
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cloudstack just
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> knows that the provided directory path has VM
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> images.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 6:23 PM, Marcus Sorensen
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <shadowsor@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Oh yes, you can use NFS, LVM, and iSCSI all
>> at the
>> >>> > same
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > time.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Multiples, in fact.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 6:19 PM, Mike
>> Tutkowski
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Looks like you can have multiple storage
>> pools:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> mtutkowski@ubuntu:~$ virsh pool-list
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Name                 State      Autostart
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> -----------------------------------------
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> default              active     yes
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> iSCSI                active     no
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 6:12 PM, Mike
>> Tutkowski
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> Reading through the docs you pointed out.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> I see what you're saying now.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> You can create an iSCSI (libvirt) storage
>> pool
>> >>> > based
>> >>> > > on
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> an iSCSI target.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> In my case, the iSCSI target would only
>> have one
>> >>> > LUN,
>> >>> > > > so
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> there would only
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> be one iSCSI (libvirt) storage volume in the
>> >>> > > (libvirt)
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> storage pool.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> As you say, my plug-in creates and destroys
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> iSCSI
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> targets/LUNs on the
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> SolidFire SAN, so it is not a problem that
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> libvirt
>> >>> > > does
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> not support
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> creating/deleting iSCSI targets/LUNs.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> It looks like I need to test this a bit to
>> see
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> if
>> >>> > > > libvirt
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> supports
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> multiple iSCSI storage pools (as you
>> mentioned,
>> >>> > since
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> each one of its
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> storage pools would map to one of my iSCSI
>> >>> > > > targets/LUNs).
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Mike
>> Tutkowski
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> LibvirtStoragePoolDef has this type:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>     public enum poolType {
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>         ISCSI("iscsi"), NETFS("netfs"),
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> LOGICAL("logical"), DIR("dir"),
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> RBD("rbd");
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>         String _poolType;
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>         poolType(String poolType) {
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>             _poolType = poolType;
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>         }
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>         @Override
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>         public String toString() {
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>             return _poolType;
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>         }
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>     }
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> It doesn't look like the iSCSI type is
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> currently
>> >>> > > being
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> used, but I'm
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> understanding more what you were getting
>> at.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> Can you tell me for today (say, 4.2), when
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> someone
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> selects the
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> SharedMountPoint option and uses it with
>> iSCSI,
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> is
>> >>> > > > that
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> the "netfs" option
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> above or is that just for NFS?
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> Thanks!
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Marcus
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> Sorensen
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> <shadowsor@gmail.com>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Take a look at this:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>> > > http://libvirt.org/storage.html#StorageBackendISCSI
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> "Volumes must be pre-allocated on the
>> iSCSI
>> >>> > server,
>> >>> > > > and
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> cannot be
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> created via the libvirt APIs.", which I
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> believe
>> >>> > > your
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> plugin will take
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> care of. Libvirt just does the work of
>> logging
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> in
>> >>> > > and
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> hooking it up to
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> the VM (I believe the Xen api does that
>> work
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> in
>> >>> > the
>> >>> > > > Xen
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> stuff).
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> What I'm not sure about is whether this
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> provides
>> >>> > a
>> >>> > > > 1:1
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> mapping, or if
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> it just allows you to register 1 iscsi
>> device
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> as
>> >>> > a
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> pool. You may need
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> to write some test code or read up a bit
>> more
>> >>> > about
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> this. Let us know.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> If it doesn't, you may just have to write
>> your
>> >>> > own
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> storage adaptor
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> rather than changing
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> LibvirtStorageAdaptor.java.
>> >>> > >  We
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> can cross that
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> bridge when we get there.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> As far as interfacing with libvirt, see
>> the
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> java
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> bindings doc.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>> http://libvirt.org/sources/java/javadoc/Normally,
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> you'll see a
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> connection object be made, then calls
>> made to
>> >>> > that
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> 'conn' object. You
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> can look at the LibvirtStorageAdaptor to
>> see
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> how
>> >>> > > that
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> is done for
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> other pool types, and maybe write some
>> test
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> java
>> >>> > > code
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> to see if you
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> can interface with libvirt and register
>> iscsi
>> >>> > > storage
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> pools before you
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> get started.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Mike
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Tutkowski
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> > So, Marcus, I need to investigate
>> libvirt
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> > more,
>> >>> > > but
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> > you figure it
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> > supports
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> > connecting to/disconnecting from iSCSI
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> > targets,
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> > right?
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> > On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Mike
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> > Tutkowski
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> > <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >> OK, thanks, Marcus
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >> I am currently looking through some of
>> the
>> >>> > > classes
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >> you pointed out
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >> last
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >> week or so.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Marcus
>> >>> > Sorensen
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >> <shadowsor@gmail.com>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> Yes, my guess is that you will need
>> the
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> iscsi
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> initiator utilities
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> installed. There should be standard
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> packages
>> >>> > > for
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> any distro. Then
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> you'd call
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> an agent storage adaptor to do the
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> initiator
>> >>> > > > login.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> See the info I
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> sent
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> previously about
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> LibvirtStorageAdaptor.java
>> >>> > and
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> libvirt iscsi
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> storage type
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> to see if that fits your need.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> On Sep 13, 2013 4:55 PM, "Mike
>> Tutkowski"
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> Hi,
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> As you may remember, during the 4.2
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> release
>> >>> > I
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> developed a SolidFire
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> (storage) plug-in for CloudStack.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> This plug-in was invoked by the
>> storage
>> >>> > > > framework
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> at the necessary
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> times
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> so that I could dynamically create
>> and
>> >>> > delete
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> volumes on the
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> SolidFire SAN
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> (among other activities).
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> This is necessary so I can establish
>> a
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> 1:1
>> >>> > > > mapping
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> between a
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> CloudStack
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> volume and a SolidFire volume for
>> QoS.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> In the past, CloudStack always
>> expected
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> the
>> >>> > > > admin
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> to create large
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> volumes ahead of time and those
>> volumes
>> >>> > would
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> likely house many
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> root and
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> data disks (which is not QoS
>> friendly).
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> To make this 1:1 mapping scheme
>> work, I
>> >>> > needed
>> >>> > > > to
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> modify logic in
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> the
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> XenServer and VMware plug-ins so they
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> could
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> create/delete storage
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> repositories/datastores as needed.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> For 4.3 I want to make this happen
>> with
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> KVM.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> I'm coming up to speed with how this
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> might
>> >>> > > work
>> >>> > > > on
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> KVM, but I'm
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> still
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> pretty new to KVM.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> Does anyone familiar with KVM know
>> how I
>> >>> > will
>> >>> > > > need
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> to interact with
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> the
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> iSCSI target? For example, will I
>> have to
>> >>> > > expect
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> Open iSCSI will be
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> installed on the KVM host and use it
>> for
>> >>> > this
>> >>> > > to
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> work?
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> Thanks for any suggestions,
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> Mike
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> --
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> Senior CloudStack Developer,
>> SolidFire
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> Inc.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> o: 303.746.7302
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> Advancing the way the world uses the
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> cloud™
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >> --
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >> Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >> Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire
>> Inc.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >> o: 303.746.7302
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >> Advancing the way the world uses the
>> cloud™
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> > --
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> > Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> > Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire
>> Inc.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> > e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> > o: 303.746.7302
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> > Advancing the way the world uses the
>> cloud™
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> --
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> o: 303.746.7302
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud™
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> --
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> o: 303.746.7302
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud™
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> --
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> o: 303.746.7302
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud™
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> o: 303.746.7302
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud™
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> o: 303.746.7302
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud™
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> --
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> o: 303.746.7302
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>>>> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud™
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>>
>> >>> > > > >>>>>> --
>> >>> > > > >>>>>> Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> > > > >>>>>> Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.
>> >>> > > > >>>>>> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> >>> > > > >>>>>> o: 303.746.7302
>> >>> > > > >>>>>> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud™
>> >>> > > > >>>
>> >>> > > > >>>
>> >>> > > > >>>
>> >>> > > > >>>
>> >>> > > > >>> --
>> >>> > > > >>> Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> > > > >>> Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.
>> >>> > > > >>> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> >>> > > > >>> o: 303.746.7302
>> >>> > > > >>> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud™
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > >
>> >>> > > > > --
>> >>> > > > > Mike Tutkowski
>> >>> > > > > Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.
>> >>> > > > > e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> >>> > > > > o: 303.746.7302
>> >>> > > > > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud™
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > --
>> >>> > > *Mike Tutkowski*
>> >>> > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>> >>> > > e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> >>> > > o: 303.746.7302
>> >>> > > Advancing the way the world uses the
>> >>> > > cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
>> >>> > > *™*
>> >>> > >
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> *Mike Tutkowski*
>> >>> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>> >>> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
>> >>> o: 303.746.7302
>> >>> Advancing the way the world uses the
>> >>> cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
>> >>> *™*
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Mike Tutkowski*
> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> o: 303.746.7302
> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
> *™*
>



-- 
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
*™*

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message