Well, certainly you don't want system vms using local storage by default. How would you live migrate them for host maintenance? I assume you mean that when you set up a zone and check 'local storage', and it pops up the big long thing stating "make sure you set the system vms to local as well in the global config", that pop up should not exist and happen by default. But the user has already selected local storage in that case.
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Ahmad Emneina <aemne...@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree, it was probably an afterthought. I was just justifying the desired > effect not the flag/workaround. > > > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Darren Shepherd < > darren.s.sheph...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I just find it annoying setting up a zone with local storage that I have >> to turn this setting on. If I have no shared storage, then system VMs >> won't deploy with out this parameter. It's just seems like a useless >> setting that might have been added because there is something else in the >> system that isn't working right. >> >> Darren >> >> > On Oct 31, 2013, at 10:52 AM, Kelcey Jamison Damage < >> kel...@backbonetechnology.com> wrote: >> > >> > That's a good point. I know the system VMs are auto created if the >> system is aware of their state being either 'Destroyed', 'Expunged'. If the >> state is 'Starting', or 'Started'/'Running' then no actions are taken. >> > >> > In your scenario, the system VM would still be 'Started' in the database >> even though communication is lost to the host, so no automatic action would >> be taken. >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > >> > From: "Darren Shepherd" <darren.s.sheph...@gmail.com> >> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >> > Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 10:47:41 AM >> > Subject: why system.vm.use.local.storage? >> > >> > Why do we have the configuration system.vm.use.local.storage? Why would >> > somebody care if they systemvm is on local storage? I'm guessing the idea >> > here is if it's on local storage we can't bring it back in a host failure >> > situation? But don't we just recreate the systemvm? >> > >> > Darren >> > >>
