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: Root-disk support for managed storage
Date Sun, 26 Jan 2014 18:39:04 GMT
So, this is my thinking on how this cloning would work (and why it would be
a problem for an SR):

1) An SR is created on a SAN volume. The SR is essentially a clustered file
system. The VDI on the SR represents a template we downloaded from
secondary storage. The SR itself contains metadata like a UUID, the name of
the SR, a description for the SR, etc. The SAN volume containing the SR has
a unique name.

2) When we need to spin up a VM based on the template that exists on our
SR, we clone the applicable SAN volume. The cloned SAN volume does have a
unique name on the SAN, but the data the cloned volume has is, as expected,
identical to the original SAN volume. This means the SR on the cloned
volume has the same UUID as the original SR. XenServer will not like it if
I introduce multiple SRs to its compute cluster (what it calls a resource
pool) that have the same UUID.

Thoughts on this?

Thanks


On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Marcus Sorensen <shadowsor@gmail.com>wrote:

> In fact I'd recommend removing the SR of the template from anything
> XenServer knows of. It just needs to exist on the SAN so it can be
> cloned for new SR root volumes.
>
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Marcus Sorensen <shadowsor@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hm, well I guest that's dependent on how your SAN clone works. Ours
> > allows you to have a unique name for each clone, so we just name the
> > clone with the new root volume UUID.
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 9:00 AM, Mike Tutkowski
> > <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
> >> Hey Marcus,
> >>
> >> One thing I thought of late last night was that an SR has a UUID
> associated
> >> with it.
> >>
> >> If I clone the SAN volume that houses the SR each time, I'll be giving
> >> XenServer SRs that have the same UUID.
> >>
> >> I guess I'll need to look into if there is some way to assign a new
> UUID to
> >> an existing SR.
> >>
> >> Perhaps you or Edison (or someone else) know about this off hand?
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> >> <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Yeah, I see that now. I was thinking my situation here would be
> different
> >>> because in the XenServer case I was looking at, CloudStack was copying
> the
> >>> template down to an SR and that same SR was later used to also house
> the
> >>> root disk (two different SRs were not involved).
> >>>
> >>> Even though my case is different, with the approach you outlined about
> >>> creating a "special" SR for the template itself, it ends up amounting
> to a
> >>> similar concept.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 11:27 PM, Marcus Sorensen <shadowsor@gmail.com
> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes. That's what all of the storage types do, they save the name of
> >>>> the file, volume, etc (along with path if necessary) on primary
> >>>> storage where the template is copied.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 11:01 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> >>>> <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
> >>>> > It looks like I could use the template_spool_ref table's local
path
> >>>> > and/or
> >>>> > install path to point to the name of the volume on the SAN that
is
> to
> >>>> > be
> >>>> > cloned when we need a root volume from this template.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Is that what you do?
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> > On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:46 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> >>>> > <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> Maybe 2) can be made to work in the template_spool_ref table...I
> need
> >>>> >> to
> >>>> >> think about it a bit.
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:42 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> >>>> >> <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> Data disks are easier than root disks.
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> To be more clear, I should say data disks are easier than
root
> disks
> >>>> >>> that
> >>>> >>> use templates (root disks that use ISOs are about the same
level
> of
> >>>> >>> difficulty as data disks).
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> I could see it going either way:
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> 1) Copy the template down once for each root disk
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> or
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> 2) Copy the template to an SR and clone the SAN volume
the SR is
> on
> >>>> >>> as
> >>>> >>> needed
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> 2) has the advantage of speed, but where do you store knowledge
of
> >>>> >>> this
> >>>> >>> special SR (in the DB somewhere)?
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:39 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> >>>> >>> <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
> >>>> >>>>
> >>>> >>>> Do you still send your SAN commands from the KVM agent?
> >>>> >>>>
> >>>> >>>> I don't have any SolidFire-specific commands outside
of the
> >>>> >>>> SolidFire
> >>>> >>>> plug-in.
> >>>> >>>>
> >>>> >>>>
> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:38 PM, Marcus Sorensen
> >>>> >>>> <shadowsor@gmail.com>
> >>>> >>>> wrote:
> >>>> >>>>>
> >>>> >>>>> Actually, I shouldn't take the liberty to speak
as though I
> >>>> >>>>> understand
> >>>> >>>>> the details about how you use SRs and VDIs. My
point though is
> >>>> >>>>> basically that you probably can and should treat
them the same
> as
> >>>> >>>>> whatever you currently do with data disks. Either
create a new
> one
> >>>> >>>>> with every root volume create and copy the template
contents to
> it
> >>>> >>>>> (like CLVM does), or create one on the SAN when
the template
> copy
> >>>> >>>>> is
> >>>> >>>>> called, prepopulate it with the template, and send
a clone
> command
> >>>> >>>>> against that one to your storage to generate new
root disks as
> >>>> >>>>> needed.
> >>>> >>>>>
> >>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:30 PM, Marcus Sorensen
> >>>> >>>>> <shadowsor@gmail.com>
> >>>> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>> >>>>> > And when I say 'the first time the template
is used, we
> create an
> >>>> >>>>> > SR',
> >>>> >>>>> > I mean cloudstack does it automatically.
> >>>> >>>>> >
> >>>> >>>>> > On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Marcus Sorensen
> >>>> >>>>> > <shadowsor@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> >>>>> >> Not's not really what I was describing,
or that's not how we
> do
> >>>> >>>>> >> it
> >>>> >>>>> >> at
> >>>> >>>>> >> least. The first time a template is used,
we create an SR
> with
> >>>> >>>>> >> one
> >>>> >>>>> >> VDI
> >>>> >>>>> >> (using your terminology as we don't do
it in Xen, but it
> should
> >>>> >>>>> >> map
> >>>> >>>>> >> to
> >>>> >>>>> >> essentially the same thing) and copy the
template contents
> into
> >>>> >>>>> >> it.
> >>>> >>>>> >> Then we remove the SR. When a root disk
is requested, we
> send a
> >>>> >>>>> >> clone
> >>>> >>>>> >> command to the SAN, and then register
the new clone as a new
> >>>> >>>>> >> volume,
> >>>> >>>>> >> then attach that as a new SR dedicated
to that root volume.
> >>>> >>>>> >> Every
> >>>> >>>>> >> root
> >>>> >>>>> >> disk that makes use of that template is
its own SR.
> >>>> >>>>> >>
> >>>> >>>>> >> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 9:30 PM, Mike
Tutkowski
> >>>> >>>>> >> <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
> >>>> >>>>> >>> Thanks for your input, Marcus.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>> Yeah, the SolidFire SAN has the ability
to clone, but I
> can't
> >>>> >>>>> >>> use
> >>>> >>>>> >>> it in this
> >>>> >>>>> >>> case.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>> Little note first: I'm going to put
some words below in
> capital
> >>>> >>>>> >>> letters to
> >>>> >>>>> >>> stress some important details. All
caps for some words can
> be
> >>>> >>>>> >>> annoying to
> >>>> >>>>> >>> some, so please understand that I
am only using them here to
> >>>> >>>>> >>> highlight
> >>>> >>>>> >>> important details. :)
> >>>> >>>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>> For managed storage (SolidFire is
an example of this), this
> is
> >>>> >>>>> >>> what
> >>>> >>>>> >>> happens
> >>>> >>>>> >>> when a user attaches a volume to a
VM for the first time (so
> >>>> >>>>> >>> this
> >>>> >>>>> >>> is for
> >>>> >>>>> >>> Disk Offerings...not root disks):
> >>>> >>>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>> 1) A volume (LUN) is created on the
SolidFire SAN that is
> ONLY
> >>>> >>>>> >>> ever
> >>>> >>>>> >>> used by
> >>>> >>>>> >>> this ONE CloudStack volume. This volume
has QoS settings
> like
> >>>> >>>>> >>> Min,
> >>>> >>>>> >>> Max, and
> >>>> >>>>> >>> Burst IOPS.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>> 2) An SR is created in the XenServer
resource pool (cluster)
> >>>> >>>>> >>> that
> >>>> >>>>> >>> makes use
> >>>> >>>>> >>> of the SolidFire volume that was just
created.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>> 3) A VDI that represents the disk
is created on the SR (this
> >>>> >>>>> >>> VDI
> >>>> >>>>> >>> essentially
> >>>> >>>>> >>> consumes as much of the SR as it can*).
> >>>> >>>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>> If the user wants to create a new
CloudStack volume to
> attach
> >>>> >>>>> >>> to a
> >>>> >>>>> >>> VM, that
> >>>> >>>>> >>> leads to a NEW SolidFire volume being
created (with its own
> >>>> >>>>> >>> QoS), a
> >>>> >>>>> >>> NEW SR,
> >>>> >>>>> >>> and a new VDI inside of that SR.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>> The same idea will exist for root
volumes. A NEW SolidFire
> >>>> >>>>> >>> volume
> >>>> >>>>> >>> will be
> >>>> >>>>> >>> created for it. A NEW SR will consume
the SolidFire volume,
> and
> >>>> >>>>> >>> only ONE
> >>>> >>>>> >>> root disk will EVER use this SR (so
there is never a need to
> >>>> >>>>> >>> clone
> >>>> >>>>> >>> the
> >>>> >>>>> >>> template we download to this SR).
> >>>> >>>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>> The next time a root disk of this
type is requested, this
> leads
> >>>> >>>>> >>> to
> >>>> >>>>> >>> a NEW
> >>>> >>>>> >>> SolidFire volume (with its own QoS),
a NEW SR, and a new
> VDI.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>> In the situation you describe (which
is called non-managed
> >>>> >>>>> >>> (meaning
> >>>> >>>>> >>> the SR
> >>>> >>>>> >>> was created ahead of time outside
of CloudStack)), you can
> have
> >>>> >>>>> >>> multiple
> >>>> >>>>> >>> root disks that leverage the same
template on the same SR.
> This
> >>>> >>>>> >>> will never
> >>>> >>>>> >>> be the case for managed storage, so
there will never be a
> need
> >>>> >>>>> >>> for
> >>>> >>>>> >>> a
> >>>> >>>>> >>> downloaded template to be cloned multiple
times into
> multiple
> >>>> >>>>> >>> root
> >>>> >>>>> >>> disks.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>> By the way, I just want to clarify,
as well, that although
> I am
> >>>> >>>>> >>> talking in
> >>>> >>>>> >>> terms of "SolidFire this an SolidFire
that" that the
> >>>> >>>>> >>> functionality
> >>>> >>>>> >>> I have
> >>>> >>>>> >>> been adding to CloudStack (outside
of the SolidFire plug-in)
> >>>> >>>>> >>> can be
> >>>> >>>>> >>> leveraged by any storage vendor that
wants a 1:1 mapping
> >>>> >>>>> >>> between a
> >>>> >>>>> >>> CloudStack volume and one of their
volumes. This is, in
> fact,
> >>>> >>>>> >>> how
> >>>> >>>>> >>> OpenStack
> >>>> >>>>> >>> handles storage by default.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>> Does that clarify my question?
> >>>> >>>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>> I was not aware of how CLVM handled
templates. Perhaps I
> should
> >>>> >>>>> >>> look into
> >>>> >>>>> >>> that.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>> By the way, I am currently focused
on XenServer, but also
> plan
> >>>> >>>>> >>> to
> >>>> >>>>> >>> implement
> >>>> >>>>> >>> support for this on KVM and ESX (although
those may be
> outside
> >>>> >>>>> >>> of
> >>>> >>>>> >>> the scope
> >>>> >>>>> >>> of 4.4).
> >>>> >>>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>> Thanks!
> >>>> >>>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>> * It consumes as much of the SR as
it can unless you you
> want
> >>>> >>>>> >>> extra
> >>>> >>>>> >>> space
> >>>> >>>>> >>> put aside for hypervisor snapshots.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 3:43 AM, Marcus
Sorensen
> >>>> >>>>> >>> <shadowsor@gmail.com>
> >>>> >>>>> >>> wrote:
> >>>> >>>>> >>>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> In other words, if you can't clone,
then
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> createDiskFromTemplate
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> should
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> copy template from secondary storage
directly onto root
> disk
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> every
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> time, and copyPhysicalDisk really
does nothing. If you can
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> clone,
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> then
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> copyPhysicalDisk should copy template
to primary, and
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> createDiskFromTemplate should
clone. Unless there's
> template
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> cloning
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> in the storage driver now, and
if so put the
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> createDiskFromTemplate
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> logic there, but you still probably
need copyPhysicalDisk
> to
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> do
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> its
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> thing on the agent.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> This is all from a KVM perspective,
of course.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 3:40 AM,
Marcus Sorensen
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> <shadowsor@gmail.com>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> wrote:
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > I'm not quite following.
 With our storage, the template
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > gets
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > copied
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > to the storage pool upon
first use, and then cloned upon
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > subsequent
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > uses. I don't remember all
of the methods immediately,
> but
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > there's one
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > called to copy the template
to primary storage, and once
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > that's
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > done
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > as you mention it's tracked
in template_spool_ref and
> when
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > root
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > disks
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > are created that's passed
as the source to copy when
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > creating
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > root
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > disks.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > Are you saying that you don't
have clone capabilities to
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > clone
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > the
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > template when root disks
are created? If so, you'd be
> more
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > like
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > CLVM
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > storage, where the template
copy actually does nothing,
> and
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > you
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > initiate a template copy
*in place* of the clone (or you
> do
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > a
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > template
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > copy to primary pool whenever
the clone normally would
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > happen).
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > CLVM
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > creates a fresh root disk
and copies the template from
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > secondary
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > storage directly to that
whenever a root disk is
> deployed,
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > bypassing
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > templates altogether. This
is because it can't
> efficiently
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > clone, and
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > if we let the template copy
to primary, it will then do a
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > full
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > copy of
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > that template from primary
to primary every time, which
> is
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > pretty
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > heavy since it's also not
thin provisioned.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > If you *can* clone, then
just copy the template to your
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > primary
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > storage as normal in your
storage adaptor
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > (copyPhysicalDisk), it
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > will
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > be tracked in template_spool_ref,
and then when root
> disks
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > are
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > created
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > it will be passed to createDiskFromTemplate
in your
> storage
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > adaptor
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > (for KVM), where you can
call a clone of that and return
> it
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > as
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > the
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > root volume . There was once
going to be template clone
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > capabilities
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > in the storage driver level
on the mgmt server, but I
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > believe
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > that was
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > work-in-progress last I checked
(4 months ago or so), so
> we
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > still have
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > to call clone to our storage
server from the agent side
> as
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > of
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > now, but
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > that call doesn't have to
do any work on the agent-side,
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > really.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 12:47
AM, Mike Tutkowski
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> > <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com>
wrote:
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> Just wanted to throw
this out there before I went to
> bed:
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> Since each root volume
that belongs to managed storage
> will
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> get
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> its own
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> copy
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> of some template (assuming
we're dealing with templates
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> here
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> and not an
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> ISO), it is possible
I may be able to circumvent a new
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> table
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> (or any
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> existing table like template_spool_ref)
entirely for
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> managed
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> storage.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> The purpose of a table
like template_spool_ref appears
> to
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> be
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> mainly to
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> make
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> sure we're not downloading
the sample template to an SR
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> multiple times
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> (and
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> this doesn't apply in
the case of managed storage since
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> each
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> root
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> volume
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> should have at most one
template downloaded to it).
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> Thoughts on that?
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> Thanks!
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014
at 12:39 AM, Mike Tutkowski
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >> <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com>
wrote:
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> Hi Edison and Marcus
(and anyone else this may be of
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> interest
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> to),
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> So, as of 4.3 I have
added support for data disks for
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> managed
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> storage
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> for
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> XenServer, VMware,
and KVM (a 1:1 mapping between a
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> CloudStack
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> volume
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> and a
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> volume on a storage
system). One of the most useful
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> abilities
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> this
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> enables
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> is support for guaranteed
storage quality of service in
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> CloudStack.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> One of the areas
I'm working on for CS 4.4 is root-disk
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> support for
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> managed storage (both
with templates and ISOs).
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> I'd like to get your
opinion about something.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> I noticed when we
download a template to a XenServer SR
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> that
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> we
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> leverage a
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> table in the DB called
template_spool_ref.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> This table keeps
track of whether or not we've
> downloaded
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> the
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> template
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> in
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> question to the SR
in question already.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> The problem for managed
storage is that the storage
> pool
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> itself can be
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> associated with many
SRs (not all necessarily in the
> same
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> cluster
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> even): one
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> SR per volume that
belongs to the managed storage.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> What this means is
every time a user wants to place a
> root
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> disk (that
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> uses
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> a template) on managed
storage, I will need to
> download a
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> template to
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> the
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> applicable SR (the
template will never be there in
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> advance).
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> That is fine. The
issue is that I cannot use the
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> template_spool_ref
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> table
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> because it is intended
on mapping a template to a
> storage
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> pool
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> (1:1
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> mapping
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> between the two)
and managed storage can download the
> same
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> template
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> many
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> times.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> It seems I will need
to add a new table to the DB to
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> support
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> this
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> feature.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> My table would allow
a mapping between a template and a
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> volume
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> from
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> managed storage.
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> Do you see an easier
way around this or is this how you
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> recommend I
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> proceed?
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> Thanks!
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> --
> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> 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>
*™*

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