Hi, On 01/08/2013 07:55 PM, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
Guys, I've pushed this as a new branch called 'resizevolume', in order to collaborate with a few of you on it. I have several questions on how to proceed, due to refactoring efforts. I'm hoping that the experts in those efforts can collaborate.1) Wido, would you be interested in looking at adding RBD resize to LibvirtComputingResource? The resize for CLVM and QCOW2 is done via scripts/storage/qcow2/resizevolume.sh at the moment, since the libvirt bindings won't support volBlockResize until you get 0.5.0 out (and even then I'm not sure if it will support anything more than just informing the hypervisor/guest of the change, which is also in the script).
No problem! I'll look at that. But I'll need libvirt-java for this. I'll try to get those resize features for libvirt-java in version 0.5.0
Wido
2) I'm not sure exactly how this will be affected by the storage refactor, but I'm sure it will be. I looked for examples in the createVolume on javelin, but it seems that the storage refactor is still early on, and per Edison's update only works for a few template commands at the moment. I thought it best to get this in as a fully fleged member of the storage API so that when the work is done on the storage commands, this will get looked at as well. So if everything looks good otherwise, I'd like to not block on the storage refactor unless this is just going to be scrapped when that comes along. 3) I've implemented resize for Xen, but only tested with local storage SR. The SR in devcloud doesn't seem to support online resize, and I'm not familiar enough with the Xen setup to really figure out if that's just a byproduct of how the SR was created, whether it's a Xen limitation in DevCloud, or what. If someone more familiar with Xen wants to take a peek it would be appreciated, however I'm not really considering it a blocker if nobody does. For now resize works offline (or with data disk detached) and fails with warning that VM needs to be stopped or data disk detached. 4) Can someone who is working with the api refactoring take this into account? I think I'd prefer it go in before the refactor, or if it doesn't that someone help me make any modifications necessary, so that it's not broken at any point in master.
