The storage.root parameter in cloud-bridge.properties can point to any filesystem: with this you will get a filesystem-backed S3 service. However the reliability, durability and scalability are guaranteed by the choice of filesystem. For example if the filesystem is an NFS mount provided by a NetApp server, the reliability properties of the NetApp server would apply.
On 1/29/13 10:39 PM, "Asmita Vagyani" <asmita.vagy...@sigma-systems.com> wrote: >Hi all, > > > >I've been doing some reading there are definitely implementation that >make use of Cloudstack and provide a Storage Instance type server. > > > >Essentially we want the same type of service as the Amazon S3 (Simple >Storage Service). > > > >Cloudstack has an S3 interface though it is not enabled by default (need >to change Global Setting): >https://cwiki.apache.org/CLOUDSTACK/s3-api-in-cloudstack.html > > > >Even though Cloudstack supports the S3 API , do we still need a storage >implementation - like CAStor, or Cloudian, or GlusterFS? > > > >Still not clear to me if we configure anything in the Cloudstack Manager >to enable this or if it is just enabling the S3 API and implementing the >storage layer? > >Please clarify. > > > >Thanks and Regards. > >Asmita Patil Vagyani. > >Tech Lead, Sigma Software Solutions, Pune, > >T: +91-20-25661992 / 93 / 94. Extn. : 286 >
