cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nitin Mehta <Nitin.Me...@citrix.com>
Subject Re: [QUESTION] Attached/Detached Volume State
Date Wed, 14 Jan 2015 01:51:43 GMT
+Min.

Unfortunately, I don’t think the framework is enhanced for all the
different kinds of resources, but it should be the way to go.
IMHO  Serialization through states was/is just a hacky way of getting
around the situation and should be discontinued.
Ideally, state of a resource should reflect only its lifecycle not the
operations such as snapshotting, migrating etc.

Thanks,
-Nitin

On 13/01/15 4:32 PM, "Mike Tutkowski" <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:

>It appears that the job queue is used for some commands while for others
>it
>is not.
>
>Is the intend of the job queue to only serialize operations that are sent
>to VMs?
>
>On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
>mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
>
>> This is 4.6.
>>
>> It seems like our state-transitioning logic is intended (as one might
>> expect) to protect the object in question from transitions that are
>>invalid
>> given it's current state (this is what I would expect).
>>
>> I do not see, say, the attach and detach operations being serialized. It
>> seems they are running simultaneously.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Nitin Mehta <Nitin.Mehta@citrix.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> States shouldn¹t be used to serialize operations on a volume. It
>>>should be
>>> used to denote the lifecycle of the volume instead.
>>> I think the async job manager does take care of the serialization.
>>>Which
>>> version do you see this issue happening ?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -Nitin
>>>
>>> On 13/01/15 12:28 PM, "Mike Tutkowski" <mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >Hi,
>>> >
>>> >Does anyone know why we don't currently have a state and applicable
>>> >transitions in Volume.State for attaching and detaching volumes?
>>> >
>>> >It seems like you'd want to, say, transition to Attaching only when
>>> you're
>>> >in the Ready state (or maybe some other states, as well).
>>> >
>>> >I think right now you can confuse the system by sending an attach
>>>command
>>> >and then a detach command before the attach command finishes (it's a
>>>race
>>> >condition...I don't think it always causes trouble).
>>> >
>>> >Thoughts?
>>> >
>>> >Thanks,
>>> >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
>>> ><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
View raw message