Leandro, Brano, I'm effectively migrating only the openstack installation, the DFM remains the same. However, if I read Brano's email correctly, besides migrating the information on openstack DB I also have to change metadata that DFM, is that right?
Here's an example of a volume I have on Essex right now: https://gist.github.com/fernandezpablo85/fd4340f0150bdf574bbb And here's what DFM returns for that volume's LUN: https://gist.github.com/fernandezpablo85/219f78545166f0c030b3 Is moving the data just from Essex db to Folsom safe in this case? On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Leandro Reox <leandro.r...@gmail.com>wrote: > Pablo, > > On folsom the block_device_mappings table its on novadb too, i totally > miss the Brano's recommendation of uuid conversion and metadata, asumming > that you hit the same dfm. > We had to do that a couple of times, but generally as all our vms are > stateless, we create them on the "new" cloud, and replicate the content, > via sharding replicas or other mechanism, without intervention > > Saludos > > > On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Brano Zarnovican <zarnovi...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 11:24 PM, pablo fernandez >> <fernandezpabl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Hi list! >> > >> > Any advice on this? Has somebody already tried it (and hopefully >> succeeded). >> >> We did this migration "in-place". On day D, we dumped Essex >> Openstack/DFM DB and restored in Folsom. I have created a patch for >> Folsom Netapp driver to recognize Essex volumes/snapshots. >> >> I assume that both your clouds are hitting the same DFM. Otherwise, >> you would have to migrate entries not only between Openstack DB, but >> DFM DB, too. Would be painful.. >> >> Folsom Netapp driver has added some meta-data to Openstack datasets >> (in DFM), so Folsom will not recognize DFM datasets created in Essex >> (and hence all Essex LUNs would be invisible). I have added that >> meta-data manually with the attached script. >> >> Volume is identified by (host, provider_location). Host is the one >> running nova-volume, provider_location is an object id in DFM db.. eg >> ("mgmt-netapp.example.com", 7574). >> >> So if you are using the same DFM, provider_location won't change, but >> you host probably would. >> >> Problem would be that you need to migrate id from decimal to UUIDs. In >> my case, this was done in Openstack DB as part of that in-place >> migration. The mapping is stored in new table "volume_id_mappings". >> Same comments apply also to snapshots. However, because of this UUID >> change, volumes names (LUNs on Netapp) are expected in different >> format. >> >> Essex: >> /OpenStack_103a49bb861e485ea05aa78f9b0216bd/vol-000009a4/vol-000009a4 >> Folsom: >> >> /OpenStack_103a49bb861e485ea05aa78f9b0216bd/vol-dcc14978-4ff1-422b-97e7-f7f668718b9e/vol-dcc14978-4ff1-422b-97e7-f7f668718b9e >> >> That was the reason for driver patch, so I did not have to rename >> existing LUNs on Netapp and DFM. >> >> It's almost easier to create all volumes in Folsom and dd the content ;-) >> >> Regards, >> >> BranoZ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack >> Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp