The doc cited explains how this works with Quantum, but not with Openstack.
VM1 is shown as being accessible via two VNICs, that implies that their is a
Hypervisor that is available by two NICs. How does Nova know that this is in
fact one Hypervisor and not two?
Similar question must be
Umar Draz asked:
I want to allocate multiple public ip address to instance, is this possible
with openStack?
In order to properly orchestrate resources you need to distinguish between the
server holding that resource
and the IP address used to talk with that server.
The fact that a
Aaron Rosen wrote:
Nova (network) does not support overlapping ip addresses so if you use nova
security groups directly this won't work.
This should be fixed in G3 using nova security groups with a nova to quantum
security group proxy. Until recently nova
meta data did not work with
I think the Swift description would be improved by changing:
Objects and files are written to multiple disk drives spread throughout
...
To
Objects are written as files to multiple disk drives spread throughout
...
Objects and files almost sounds as though they are different
John Griffith wrote:
Yes, I'm really agree with Diego.
It would be a good choice for submitting a blueprint with this storage
feature based on tenants.
I think the key is that the File/Object service should be enabled similarly to
how volumes are enabled,
With similar tenant scoping and
Eugene Kirpichov wrote:
I suggest you to read a series of our blogposts on H/A in openstack (in this
order):
http://www.mirantis.com/blog/intro-to-openstack-in-production/
http://www.mirantis.com/blog/ha-platform-components-mysql-rabbitmq/
Greg Holt wrote:
Followup note: Though briefly mentioned by John, I like to emphasize this
also affects COPY (or PUT with X-Copy-From) requests,
and #1 (upping the lb timeout) is really the only solution unless we go crazy
and implement async requests with status checks.
Well, another
Pete Zaitcev wrote:
It sounds strange to make Swift aware of the specific LFS. One day I come up
with ZaitcevFS and what happens
then? Patching Swift again I presume.
The intent of the patch is to allow any local file system to use the same
polymorphic interface. Obviously we may
be biased
Doug Hellmann wrote:
There are a couple of other alternatives:
1. We could move notification handling into its own daemon to get it out of
the collector. This new daemon would still run on a central service, and would
need to be set up to support load balancing
just as the collector is now.
Nicholas de BONFILS asked:
I use zfs for other project, and I'm very interested in using it everywhere
(when possible). One functionality zfs bring is zvol :
it allows to create a block device from a zfs pool (a zfs property allow to
share this device with iscsi).
Mirantis and Nexenta
Jan Drake wrote:
For what it's worth, I've noticed a generally myopic trend towards python
only. Node.js can play many very good roles as an
implementation strategy for various openstack capabilities, especially at the
edge. I was excited to see it being included.
There's a balance to
One of the major complication I see in the API is that users can be associated
with multiple tenants.
What is the benefit of this? What functionality would be lost if a human user
merely had to use a different account with each tenant?
There are numerous issues with multi-tenant users. For
Tim Bell wrote:
➢ In the research environment, we have frequent cases where a user is
associated with multiple tenants.
For example, when you are finishing work on a previous project but are
mainly working on the new one.
As we move towards domain/tenant/user, we need to ensure that the
Nick Barcet wrote:
a) the queue must guaranty the delivery of messages.
To the contrary of monitoring, loss of events may have important billing
impacts, it therefore cannot be an option that message be lost.
I don't think absolute reliability is desirable for this application. SCTP
Chmouel Boudjnah asked:
devstack install swift if you are adding the service to your localrc (as
specified in devstack README.rst). By
default if swift is installed it will configure three different replicas and
due of the nature of replication
makes a lot of IO which lead to people
khabou imen asked:
➢
➢ can any one help me in understanding how swift indexation happens ,
➢ I am tryind to develop a client looking for a specific file stored with
openstack storage
Your client would have to match what the Swift Proxy server did for a GET,
including tracking which servers
Lorin Hochstein asked:
Are snapshots only supported on qemu/kvm, or do they work with other
hypervisors as well? (Does Xen support qcow2 images?)
Does OpenStack do anything with snapshots other than using them to generate
new images? I was a little confused by the existence of the
andi.abes asked:
Would this also be applicable to the ephemeral instance storage?
An ephemeral instance is essentially a non-persistent clone of a snapshot image.
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to :
Andi Abes wrote:
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Caitlin Bestler
caitlin.best...@nexenta.com wrote:
andi.abes asked:
Would this also be applicable to the ephemeral instance storage?
An ephemeral instance is essentially a non-persistent clone of a snapshot
image.
that's an interesting
What do you mean by connecting at the same time? The semantics of a block
service is that a volume is mounted by a single user at a time.
When you want something more complex you should build that with a proxy on top
of the base service. What you are talking about is a very
Specialized need with
Joshua Harlow wrote:
What changes would be needed to make qcow2 files work as snapshots?
Some type of image dependency management in glance (and failure cases) and
the corresponding dependency fetching in nova (and failure cases)?
Might be something pretty useful to have, instead of forcing
It can be accessed here:
http://info.nexenta.com/rs/nexenta/images/OpenstackSwiftCCOW.pdf
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help :
from mixed repositories?
From: Justin Santa Barbara [mailto:jus...@fathomdb.com]
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2012 4:40 PM
To: Caitlin Bestler
Cc: Jorge Williams; Mark Nottingham; Thierry Carrez;
openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Openstack] Just JSON, and extensibility
It's easy when each
The argument that XML has better extensibility than JSON isn't very convincing
to my ears.
I'm an old war horse, and recall extending message formats in ANSI C so as to
maintain backwards
compatibility with existing clients (by versioning the struct name itself and
always keeping the same
Exactly what do you see as the required non-linear extensibility?
These are ultimately requests to a server. Each new extension is coded in that
server.
There is no value in a client making up its own extensions that are not
understood by the server.
What is relevant is a server continuing to
Eoghan Glynn wrote:
The ultimate goal of distributed dedup is scenario #1. Only the client
software can determine the optimum chunk boundaries,
Agreed, this is where the maximum savings can be acheived, at the cost of
imposing some complexity on the client layer. I'd be interested in
Stefano Marfuli wrote:
For the summit, I don't think the standard is: use what you're familiar with
:)
Speaking from experience here, don't forget to remove the XYZ Company
Confidential from your template though.
___
Mailing list:
Throughout the discussion on distributed rate limiting I've had the annoying
feeling that I've heard this joke before.
Basically, are we looking for our keys under the street lamp because the light
is good rather than looking for them
where they were lost?
Has anyone studied the effectiveness
Caitlin Replies inline /Caitlin
-Original Message-
From: andi abes [mailto:andi.a...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 11:32 AM
To: Jay Pipes; Caitlin Bestler
Cc: openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Openstack] Question on wsgi rate limiting
Caitlin, I'm curious what were
-Original Message-
From: andi abes [mailto:andi.a...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2012 12:12 PM
To: Caitlin Bestler
Cc: Jay Pipes; openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Openstack] Question on wsgi rate limiting
Caitlin, alas, you missed my point.
The intent of rate
There are numerous reasons why you would want your Swift Object Server to also
host a NAS server.
But whether you are talking Nova volumes or Swift Objects, you would generally
want the Volume Server
or Object Server to access those directly rather than via NAS over a general
network
Brebner, Gavin asked:
Price ! Why provide expensive redundant storage when cheap disks will do just
as well ?
Because you are interested in the total cost.
Using excessive network replication rather than local replication makes for a
more expensive
And less robust solution -- as long as the
Ghe Rivero wrote:
Ø I think is time (after essex release) to rethink the way plugins are
integrated into mainline code. This problem,
an outdated plugin, it's not new (Hyper-V), and with the increasing numbers of
them (storage like Zadara, Nexenta...
network with Nicira, BigSwitch,
Andi abes asked:
Doesn't that depend on the ratios of read vs write?
In a read tilted environment (e.g. CDN's, image stores etc), being able to
dedup at the block level in the
relatively rare write case seems a boon. The simplification this could allow
- performing localized dedup
Joe Gordon asked:
Can SHA-1 collisions be generated? If so can you point me to the article?
Check Wikipedia on cryptographic hashing and especially preimage attack
To summarize, SHA-256 is effectively immune from a pre image attack. Even MD5
is effectiely
Paulo,
I believe you'll find that we're thinking along the same lines. Please review
my proposal at http://etherpad.openstack.org/P9MMYSWE6U
One quick observation is that SHA-1 is totally inadequate for fingerprinting
objects in a public object store. An attacker could easily
predict the
Justin Santa Barbara wrote
Yes, I do have a non-nova DHCP server. However, even if I didn't, and even
if iptables allowed talking to 169.254 with the magic link-local, cloud-init
still couldn't configure the IP address... :-(
If Linux assigned a 169.254 address to an Ethernet port then
John Dickinson wrote:
Here's how to find the usable space for swift
marketing size of the drive (eg 2TB) * .92 (to account for formatted size *
.8 (for 80% fullness) / replicas
If you have 15 TB of formatted space with 3 replicas, that gives you 5TB of
usable space. If you have 15TB of
Mark Nottingham wrote:
On 31/01/2012, at 2:48 PM, andi abes wrote:
The current semantics allow you to do
1) the the most recent cached copy, using the http caching mechanism. This
will ignore any updates to the swift cluster, as long as the cache is not
stale
2) get a recent copy
Mark Nottingham asked:
Why not just use
Cache-Control: no-cache?
That way, intervening caches will do the right thing too...
Even with no caching anywhere you still have N replicas (typically three) that
will be updated in an arbitrary order,
and clients that read from any one of those
The approach here looks solid, but I'm not sure if it goes far enough.
One issue that Keystone has to resolve eventually is how to authenticate
request for tenant-specific file system users.
Basically the core authentication system allows satellite authentication
systems to authenticate users
John Dickinson wrote:
The storage volumes referenced in the ring are identified by an IP, port, and
mount point. So, it is possible to use
network attached storage for swift (as long as it still supports xattrs).
However, I don't know if this has ever really
been tried (especially in
A new put can only succeed if it has successfully updated a full majority of
the replicas (typically 2 out of 3).
Therefore two different updates cannot concurrently succeed, one of them has to
know that it is the later transaction.
If you aren't forcing a Get to reference all servers, using
Scott Moser wrote:
within kvm/qemu, the path that is being worked to getting host-guest
communication outside
of networking is being done via 'qemu-ga'.
http://wiki.qemu.org/Features/QAPI/GuestAgent
Thats a guest agent that would run inside.
It will communicate over a virtual serial
Lendro Reox asked:
We're replicating our datacenter in another location (something like Amazons
east and west coast) , thinking about our applications and
our use of Swift, is there any way that we can set up weights for our
datanodes so if a request enter via for example DATACENTER 1 ,
My understanding of multi-tenant would imply that:
* Tenant X and Tenant Y could both have a user 'jsmith'
* Clients for either Tenant X or Tenant Y can format HTTP submissions
as user jsmith
that will look identical but will actually reference different accounts.
* A
Passing standard integration tests that shows an option dealing with a special
installation has no adverse
effect on a reference environment makes sense.
It may be possible to support central test equipment in this case, but that
will definitely not be the
case for every possible enhancement.
John Dickinson wrote:
Updating existing container metadata with a POST is entirely supported and
intended behavior. (The same also applies to adding/updating metadata on an
account.)
Having read those exact sequences recently to determine some implications of
something I was
Joeseph Heck wrote:
The dashboard (project Horizon) depends on these today to interact with the
REST API's to provide a user interface today.
That one wouldn't be a problem.
What would be a problem is if one of the referenced projecs, say swift, tried
to use python-daskboard-client.
So
Monty Taylor wrote:
OpenStack projects that need to depend on these will reference the git repo
of the project in their
tools/pip-requires file. This should take care of depends for developers.
Normal installation depends
can be taken care of by distro packagers as usual.
Why would an
Jay Pipes wrote:
I'm not quite following you... the API doesn't have anything to do with the
backend storage implementation, either in the 1.x or 2.0 API.
Could you elaborate a bit more so I understand what you are referring to here?
What I am arguing is that the mapping of API-visible
Jorge Williams wrote:
Push notifications don't make your core system any more complex. You push
the change to a message queue and rely on another system to do the work.
That is only true if the messaging system and the core system are largely
independent, which could have some implications
WADL sounds like a wonderful validation tool.
But shouldn't our primary goal be finding a consistent way to describe the APIs
for *application developers*.
Syntax tools, whether ancient notations like BNF or the latest XML concoction
only tell you the syntax of the operation.
There also has to
failure it is not useless. We suspect that a lower
priority
replication is the correct response, but this is something that should be
discussed
by the team as a whole.
On 09/15/2011 10:18 AM, Caitlin Bestler wrote:
Greetings,
A blueprint has been submitted for an extension to enable Local File
] On
Behalf Of Caitlin Bestler
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 11:05 AM
To: openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: [Openstack] First patch for LocalFS enhancement available for review
The LocalFS proposal was first posted a month ago, which is quoted below.
To quickly recap the purpose is to enable
The “Pre-condition Required” status is definitely a good idea, but at least for
Swift it is a band-aid. Full S3-style versioning would be a better solution.
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
With some very minor re-wording the “429 Too Many Requests” response could just
as easily apply when the user
has been limited to a specific number of outstanding requests. Essentially the
server tells the user that it will queue
at most N requests from the User and that the N+1st will be
George Reese wrote:
HTTP methods are well defined and the system should behave in
accordance with those definitions. Otherwise, even saying the word REST
is a joke.
Is your point that because OpenStack APIs should be REST complaint that
there would never be a V2 on a Get operation? That is,
George Reese wrote:
No, not at all.
The object is /servers/1234 regardless of the versioning of the API.
It's an object that exists
independent of your API and its version. A URI should represent a
single, persistent reference to that object.
The version is really an attribute of the
Leandor Reox wrote:
How is the rest of the community going to participate or leave their opinion
on why some design
path is going to be taken, or maybe leave their feedback of why an
arquitecture change is going
to be made. Will be an open list ? or just for few ?
Will be launchapd the
Nick Khamis asked:
I was wondering if any effort has been made regarding supporting
infiniband
devices to support I/O Virtualization, RDMA etc..? If so, can you
please direct
me to the latest documentation.
Adding RDMA support to OpenStack will be a challenge with the current
software
Narayan Desai wrote:
I suspect that the original poster was looking for instance access
(mediated in some way) to IB gear.
When we were trying to figure out how to best use our IB gear inside
of openstack, we decided that
it was too risky to try exposing IB at the verbs layer to instances
The ObjectController class in objs/server.py contains a container_update
method to update the
Object entry in the Container after an Object has been updated.
Since multiple Object Servers will update the same object this struck me
as curious, surely doing
It in the Proxy Server would be more
Examining the Proxy and Object Server code I believe there is a problem
when two Proxies
attempt to update the same object at the same exact time (i.e. the two
proxies have identical
timestamps for the transaction).
For PUT, POST and DELETE the Object Server will rename the temporary
file to
The keystone examples are focused on the end user who launch and control
VMs, and the supporting
infrastructure for Tentant management.
My question is whether Keystone is also supposed to be extensible to
manage the identities used by
applications running on those VMs to access Swift Objects
Vineeth Pillai wrote:
Rather I feel that, this information can be provided at the time of
adding devices. As of now, the format for adding
device is zZONE ID-IP:PORT/DEVICE
This can be modified as:
zZONE ID-IP:PORT/DEVICE[:MIRROR COUNT]
The etherpad proposal has been modified to detail how
Greetings,
A blueprint has been submitted for an extension to enable Local File Systems to
take responsibility for
certain operations, allowing generic Swift code to offload some burdens when
these optional capabilities
are available.
The goal of this proposal is to allow an Object Server to
What is the expected behavior when an object uploaded using Large Object
Support
is referenced as the source for a server-side copy using X-Copy-From?
I'm still learning python, but I think what I've read is that the proxy
will do a self.get
on the aggregate file, which will then be too big
Joshua Harlow asked:
Is there any doc on how complete the openstack EC2 api is with a fixed
version of amazon's actual release API.
Maybe some table that says which functions are implemented and which
ones aren't for a given version of the
EC2 api and a given version of openstack?
The same
69 matches
Mail list logo
