On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 11:37 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Chip Childers > <chip.child...@sungard.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Hari Kannan <hari.kan...@citrix.com> wrote: >>> Hello All, >>> >>> >>> >>> I wish to propose a better VM sync in CloudStack - I have added some >>> details >>> here<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Configurable+setting+to+use+linked+clones+or+not+on+VMware> >>> along with a JIRA ticket 670 >>> >>> Please review and comment >>> >>> Hari Kannan >> >> +1 to the concept. >> >> Same question as other emails: what release are you thinking for this? >> Is someone taking this work on? >> >> I pulled out your question on the design page, and have some thoughts: >> >>> Should this be at a template level or account level or VM level?? >> >> Isn't this something that's more infrastructure centric? i.e.: linked >> clone functionality is provided by the hypervisor, and really is an >> operator decision (not a user decision). Should the configuration >> reflect that, instead of leaking the infra implementation details to >> the end user? >> > > I don't know that this is truly infra-specific - why not make it part > of the service offering; like local storage. Admin has to configure > it, but user gets the option of choosing it. > > --David >
That's reasonable... the concern I have is that I'm not interested in the end user selecting this without the operator agreeing to offering it. Service offerings are certainly a way to accomplish that goal, while also allowing users to decide when to use it. -chip
