[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-7235?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jie Yu updated MESOS-7235:
--------------------------
Description:
Currently, Mesos supports both [local persistent
volumes|https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/master/docs/persistent-volume.md]
as well as [external persistent
volumes|https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/master/docs/docker-volume.md].
However, both of them are not ideal.
Local persistent volumes do not support offering physical or logical block
devices directly. Also, frameworks do not have choices to select filesystems
for their local persistent volumes. There are also some [usability
problem|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4209] with the local
persistent volumes. Mesos does support [multiple local
disks|https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/master/docs/multiple-disk.md].
However, it’s a big burden for operators to configure each agent properly to be
able to leverage this feature.
External persistent volumes support in Mesos currently bypasses the resource
management part. In other words, using an external persistent volume does not
go through the usual offer cycle. Mesos doesn’t track resources associated with
the external volumes. This makes quota control, reservation, fair sharing
almost impossible to implement. Also, the current interface Mesos uses to
interact with volume providers is the [Docker Volume Driver interface
(DVDI)|https://docs.docker.com/engine/extend/plugins_volume/], which is very
specific to operations on a particular agent.
The main problem I see currently is that we don’t have a coherent story for
storage. Yes, we have some primitives in Mesos that can support some stateful
services, but this is far from ideal. Some of them are just the stop gap
solution (e.g., the external volume support). This epic tries to tell a
coherent story for supporting storage in Mesos.
was:
Currently, Mesos supports both [local persistent
volumes|https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/master/docs/persistent-volume.md]
as well as [external persistent
volumes|https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/master/docs/docker-volume.md].
However, both of them are not ideal.
Local persistent volumes do not support offering physical or logical block
devices directly. Also, frameworks do not have choices to select filesystems
for their local persistent volumes. There are also some [usability
problem|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4209] with the local
persistent volumes. Mesos does support [multiple local
disks|https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/master/docs/multiple-disk.md].
However, it’s a big burden for operators to configure each agent properly to be
able to leverage this feature.
External persistent volumes support in Mesos currently bypasses the resource
management part. In other words, using an external persistent volume does not
go through the usual offer cycle. Mesos doesn’t track resources associated with
the external volumes. This makes quota control, reservation, fair sharing
almost impossible to implement. Also, the current interface Mesos uses to
interact with volume providers is the [Docker Volume Driver interface
(DVDI)|https://docs.docker.com/engine/extend/plugins_volume/], which is very
specific to operations on a particular agent.
The main problem I see currently is that we don’t have a coherent story for
storage. Yes, we have some primitives in Mesos that can support some stateful
services, but this is far from ideal. Some of them are just the stop gap
solution (e.g., the external volume support). This design tries to tell a
coherent story for supporting storage in Mesos.
> Improve Storage Support using Resources Provider
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MESOS-7235
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-7235
> Project: Mesos
> Issue Type: Epic
> Reporter: Jie Yu
>
> Currently, Mesos supports both [local persistent
> volumes|https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/master/docs/persistent-volume.md]
> as well as [external persistent
> volumes|https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/master/docs/docker-volume.md].
> However, both of them are not ideal.
> Local persistent volumes do not support offering physical or logical block
> devices directly. Also, frameworks do not have choices to select filesystems
> for their local persistent volumes. There are also some [usability
> problem|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4209] with the local
> persistent volumes. Mesos does support [multiple local
> disks|https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/master/docs/multiple-disk.md].
> However, it’s a big burden for operators to configure each agent properly to
> be able to leverage this feature.
> External persistent volumes support in Mesos currently bypasses the resource
> management part. In other words, using an external persistent volume does not
> go through the usual offer cycle. Mesos doesn’t track resources associated
> with the external volumes. This makes quota control, reservation, fair
> sharing almost impossible to implement. Also, the current interface Mesos
> uses to interact with volume providers is the [Docker Volume Driver interface
> (DVDI)|https://docs.docker.com/engine/extend/plugins_volume/], which is very
> specific to operations on a particular agent.
> The main problem I see currently is that we don’t have a coherent story for
> storage. Yes, we have some primitives in Mesos that can support some stateful
> services, but this is far from ideal. Some of them are just the stop gap
> solution (e.g., the external volume support). This epic tries to tell a
> coherent story for supporting storage in Mesos.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
