----- Original Message ----- > From: "Itamar Heim" <[email protected]> > To: "Jon Choate" <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 7:26:24 PM > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] the future of template cloning > > On 01/16/2012 06:16 PM, Jon Choate wrote: > > On 01/16/2012 10:58 AM, Itamar Heim wrote: > >> On 01/16/2012 05:46 PM, Jon Choate wrote: > >>> On 01/16/2012 09:46 AM, Livnat Peer wrote: > >>>> On 12/01/12 22:45, Ayal Baron wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>>>> We are going to be able to store the disks for a template on > >>>>>> different storage domains due to the multiple storage domain > >>>>>> feature. Cloning a template will still be possible, but will > >>>>>> it > >>>>>> provide any value? Thoughts? > >>>>> I see no relation between the two options. > >>>>> > >>>>> Scenario 1: I can create a VM with a single disk and create a > >>>>> template from it. > >>>>> I would still want to be able to clone the template in order to > >>>>> provision VMs from it on different domains. > >>>>> > >>>>> Scenario 2: same thing with multiple disks on same domain. > >>>>> > >>>>> Scenario 3: I have a template with 2 disks on 2 different > >>>>> domains > >>>>> (domain A and domain B) and I want to have another copy of the > >>>>> template on domain C and domain D > >>>>> > >>>> Hi Jon, > >>>> > >>>> After talking to Michael Pasternak it seems that we did not > >>>> implemented > >>>> copyTemplate in the REST API, it seems to be a gap that we have. > >>>> > >>>> This gap is playing in our favor, we can remove the copyTemplate > >>>> verb > >>>> and introduce copyDisk verb. > >>>> > >>>> The template disks can be copied to another SD. > >>>> When creating a VM from template the user can choose per disk > >>>> the > >>>> destination SD (only SD with the disks are eligible candidates). > >>> wait, when creating a VM from a template, the user won't get a > >>> choice > >>> will they? Won't the VM disks have to go on the same storage > >>> domain as > >>> the template disks they were created from? > >> > >> yes, but the template disks can be copied to multiple storage > >> domains, > >> so the user can choose for the VM/disk which storage domain to > >> create > >> them from (per storage domains that have copies of that disk) > > OH! I totally misunderstood. So what you are saying is that a > > template > > can have N number of copies of the same disk each on a different > > storage > > domain. I had thought that if you wanted that type of situation you > > would have multiple copies of the template itself too.
yes, one copy of disk per domain though. > > > > Just to be clear, does this mean that the plan is to phase out the > > current clone template command and instead implementing a clone > > disk > > command so that a template can duplicate its disks individually? > > pretty much, yes. > though i'd imagine 'clone template' would still be useful to have for > the user. not sure if it implies core should expose it as well to > allow > easier usage at UI level for such a task. we can leave it untouched - means copyTemplate get 1 destination domain, and copies all disks to it, but i think it will be unusable (and problematic - what if one of the disks already exists on the destination?), what the user really wants is to specify which disks to copy and destination per disk, and i don't see a reason to create a backend command to do it > _______________________________________________ > Engine-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel > _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
