cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mike Tutkowski <>
Subject Re: Back end volume names in KVM
Date Thu, 10 Oct 2013 05:05:48 GMT
Yeah, I'm not really clear how the snapshot strategy works if you have
multiple vendors that implement that interface either.

On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 9:57 PM, Marcus Sorensen <> wrote:

> Does anyone have any reservations about changing the volume identifier in
> KVM's volume creation command to be the uuid of the volume? Currently for
> new volumes it generates a random uuid and passes that back to be stored in
> the database. From an admin perspective, the only way to link a volume on
> the back end (be it a qcow2 image or an LVM volume) to one as reported is
> to look in the DB and see what this 'secondary uuid' is and look for THAT
> as the filename/image name on the back end. It would simply remove a layer
> of translating uuid to another hidden uuid to get file/volume name.
> It shouldn't disrupt or change current volumes, just new ones.
> The only caveat I can think of so far is if we wanted multiple files/images
> on the back end to map to one volume, but I don't see that as a blocker
> since it would probably have lots of other implications to the tracking
> volume objects.

*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the

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