Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

From: Coffman, Joel M. [mailto:joel.coff...@jhuapl.edu] Sent: Thursday, December 3, 2015 2:07 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick From: "duncan.tho...@gmail.com<mailto:duncan.tho...@gmail.com>" <dunc

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

On 12/03/2015 07:40 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote: On 3 December 2015 at 11:14, Li, Xiaoyan > wrote: Just to clear the data operations cinder needs to touch plaintext data are: 1) Create volume from glance image 2) Create glance

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

lt;mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>> Date: Monday, November 30, 2015 at 9:13 AM To: "openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>> Subject: Re: [op

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

On 11/30/2015 09:04 AM, Coffman, Joel M. wrote: On 11/25/15, 11:33 AM, "Ben Swartzlander" > wrote: On 11/24/2015 03:27 PM, Nathan Reller wrote: the cinder admin and the nova admin are ALWAYS the same people There

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder]Do we have project scope for cinder?

Hi, Duncan 2015-11-30 15:54 GMT+08:00 Duncan Thomas : > Hi WangHao > > This was quite thoroughly discussed during the early discussions on > replication. The general statement was 'not yet'. Getting any kind of > workable replication API has proven to be very, very

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder]Do we have project scope for cinder?

As a side note to the DR discussion here, there was a session in Tokyo that talked about a new DR project called Smaug. You can see their mission statement here: https://launchpad.net/smaug https://github.com/openstack/smaug There is another service in the making called DRagon:

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder]Do we have project scope for cinder?

Hi Wang Hao, Here¹s a Cinder spec in review on replicating a group of volumes: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/229722/ It is a not an easy problem to solve. Not that we should rush on this problem, but we should start thinking about how to solve this as some backends can only replicate a CG

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder]Do we have project scope for cinder?

On 11/29/2015 02:02 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote: > On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 11:44:19AM +, Dulko, Michal wrote: >> On Sat, 2015-11-28 at 10:56 +0800, hao wang wrote: >>> Hi guys, >>> >>> I notice nova have a clarification of project scope: >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder]Do we have project scope for cinder?

Thank you Walter for those information. Yes, I knew Smaug, actually I was one of speakers in this session :). This project was started by my colleague, Eran Gampel. AFAIK, resources in Cinder(volumes, etc.) is considered as one of protection objects in it. So we can see there are more and more

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder]Do we have project scope for cinder?

Thanks very much, Anita, very usefully information, I will check it. 2015-11-30 23:36 GMT+08:00 Anita Kuno : > On 11/29/2015 02:02 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote: >> On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 11:44:19AM +, Dulko, Michal wrote: >>> On Sat, 2015-11-28 at 10:56 +0800, hao wang

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder]Do we have project scope for cinder?

Thanks Xing Yang, I have noticed this spec, it's glad to see you to start this work. 2015-11-30 23:10 GMT+08:00 yang, xing : > Hi Wang Hao, > > Here¹s a Cinder spec in review on replicating a group of volumes: > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/229722/ > > It is a not an easy

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

On 11/25/15, 11:33 AM, "Ben Swartzlander" > wrote: On 11/24/2015 03:27 PM, Nathan Reller wrote: the cinder admin and the nova admin are ALWAYS the same people There is interest in hybrid clouds where the Nova and Cinder services are managed

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

On 30 November 2015 at 16:04, Coffman, Joel M. wrote: > On 11/25/15, 11:33 AM, "Ben Swartzlander" wrote: > > On 11/24/2015 03:27 PM, Nathan Reller wrote: > > Trying to design a system where we expect nova to do data encryption but > not cinder

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder]Do we have project scope for cinder?

On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 11:44:19AM +, Dulko, Michal wrote: > On Sat, 2015-11-28 at 10:56 +0800, hao wang wrote: > > Hi guys, > > > > I notice nova have a clarification of project scope: > > http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/project_scope.html > > > > I want to find cinder's, but

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder]Do we have project scope for cinder?

On Sat, 2015-11-28 at 10:56 +0800, hao wang wrote: > Hi guys, > > I notice nova have a clarification of project scope: > http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/project_scope.html > > I want to find cinder's, but failed, do you know where to find it? > > It's important to let developers know

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder]Do we have project scope for cinder?

Sean and Michal, In fact, there is a reason that I ask this question. Recently I have a confusion about if cinder should provide the ability of Disaster Recovery to storage resources, like volume. I mean we have volume replication v1, but for DR, specially DR between two independent OpenStack

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder]Do we have project scope for cinder?

Hi Philipp, 2015-11-30 14:36 GMT+08:00 Philipp Marek : > Hi Hao Wang, > >> In fact, there is a reason that I ask this question. Recently I have a >> confusion about if cinder should provide the ability of Disaster >> Recovery to storage resources, like volume. I mean we

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder]Do we have project scope for cinder?

Hi WangHao This was quite thoroughly discussed during the early discussions on replication. The general statement was 'not yet'. Getting any kind of workable replication API has proven to be very, very difficult to get right - we won't know for another full cycle whether we've actually gotten it

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder]Do we have project scope for cinder?

Hi Hao Wang, > In fact, there is a reason that I ask this question. Recently I have a > confusion about if cinder should provide the ability of Disaster > Recovery to storage resources, like volume. I mean we have volume > replication v1, but for DR, specially DR between two independent >

[openstack-dev] [cinder]Do we have project scope for cinder?

Hi guys, I notice nova have a clarification of project scope: http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/project_scope.html I want to find cinder's, but failed, do you know where to find it? It's important to let developers know what feature should be introduced into cinder and what shouldn't.

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

On 11/24/2015 03:27 PM, Nathan Reller wrote: the cinder admin and the nova admin are ALWAYS the same people There is interest in hybrid clouds where the Nova and Cinder services are managed by different providers. The customer would place higher trust in Nova because you must trust the compute

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] Mitaka Design Summit Recap

Thanks Sean for the nice recap, helps folks who couldn't attend the summit. On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 2:53 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote: > Cinder Mitaka Design Summit Summary > > Will the Real Block Storage Service Please Stand Up >

[openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

> the cinder admin and the nova admin are ALWAYS the same people There is interest in hybrid clouds where the Nova and Cinder services are managed by different providers. The customer would place higher trust in Nova because you must trust the compute service, and the customer would place less

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

On 11/23/2015 06:03 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 02:44:17PM -0500, Ben Swartzlander wrote: On 11/20/2015 01:19 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 02:45:15PM +0200, Duncan Thomas wrote: Brick does not have to take over the decisions in order to be a

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

- From: Li, Xiaoyan [mailto:xiaoyan.li at intel.com] Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 8:57 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions); Daniel P. Berrange Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick Hi, Except creating encrypted volume from

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][glance]Upload encrypted volumes to images

On 24/11/15 07:55 +, Li, Xiaoyan wrote: On Nov 23, 2015 22:34, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 07:05:05AM +0100, Philipp Marek wrote: About uploading encrypted volumes to image, there are three options: 1. Glance only keeps non-encrypted images. So when uploading

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 02:44:17PM -0500, Ben Swartzlander wrote: > On 11/20/2015 01:19 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > >On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 02:45:15PM +0200, Duncan Thomas wrote: > >>Brick does not have to take over the decisions in order to be a useful > >>repository for the code. The

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 11:34:29AM -0800, Walter A. Boring IV wrote: > On 11/20/2015 10:19 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > >On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 02:45:15PM +0200, Duncan Thomas wrote: > >>Brick does not have to take over the decisions in order to be a useful > >>repository for the code. The

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

Hi Daniel Much of this got discussed before. Encrypted images uploaded to glance aren't shareable, and there is definitely a desire by many users to keep the usual glance functionality while having encryption at rest in cinder for e.g. regulatory purposes. There is also some desire to be able

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick Hi Daniel Much of this got discussed before. Encrypted images uploaded to glance aren't shareable, and there is definitely a desire by many users to keep the usual glance functionality while having encryption at rest

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] [Sahara] Block Device Driver updates

Hi Zhidong, Unfortunately stable/kilo branch is opened only for security fixes now. So we can't backport this fix. Regards, Ivan Kolodyazhny, http://blog.e0ne.info/ On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 4:43 AM, Zhidong Yu wrote: > It seems there was a bug introduced in Kilo and then

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][glance]Upload encrypted volumes to images

On 23/11/15 03:45 +, Li, Xiaoyan wrote: Hi all, More help about volume encryption is needed. About uploading encrypted volumes to image, there are three options: 1. Glance only keeps non-encrypted images. So when uploading encrypted volumes to image, cinder de-crypts the data and upload.

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][glance]Upload encrypted volumes to images

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 03:45:55AM +, Li, Xiaoyan wrote: > Hi all, > More help about volume encryption is needed. > > About uploading encrypted volumes to image, there are three options: > 1. Glance only keeps non-encrypted images. So when uploading encrypted > volumes to image, cinder

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][glance]Upload encrypted volumes to images

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 07:05:05AM +0100, Philipp Marek wrote: > > About uploading encrypted volumes to image, there are three options: > > 1. Glance only keeps non-encrypted images. So when uploading encrypted > >volumes to image, cinder de-crypts the data and upload. > > 2. Glance maintain

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

List (not for usage questions); Daniel P. Berrange Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick Hi, Except creating encrypted volume from images, uploading encrypted volumes to image, as Duncan said there is desire to migrate volumes between encrypted and unencrypted

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][glance]Upload encrypted volumes to images

On Nov 23, 2015 22:34, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 07:05:05AM +0100, Philipp Marek wrote: >>> About uploading encrypted volumes to image, there are three options: >>> 1. Glance only keeps non-encrypted images. So when uploading > encrypted >>>volumes to image, cinder

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][glance]Upload encrypted volumes to images

> About uploading encrypted volumes to image, there are three options: > 1. Glance only keeps non-encrypted images. So when uploading encrypted >volumes to image, cinder de-crypts the data and upload. > 2. Glance maintain encrypted images. Cinder just upload the encrypted >data to image.

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][glance]Upload encrypted volumes to images

(1) is what we were working towards. To my mind, it is the right option. (2) Means that you have an encryption key shared between volumes, same as backups currently. It also means you can't share images, which is very limiting. (3) Makes BFV basically useless with encrypted volumes. Given there

[openstack-dev] [cinder][glance]Upload encrypted volumes to images

Hi all, More help about volume encryption is needed. About uploading encrypted volumes to image, there are three options: 1. Glance only keeps non-encrypted images. So when uploading encrypted volumes to image, cinder de-crypts the data and upload. 2. Glance maintain encrypted images. Cinder

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] [Sahara] Block Device Driver updates

It seems there was a bug introduced in Kilo and then fixed in Liberty [6]. However, since there are more users of Kilo than of Liberty, I am wondering if the fix has been back ported to Kilo. I could not find it except for this one [7] which seems to be a different issue. [6]

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 03:22:04AM +, Li, Xiaoyan wrote: > Hi all, > > To fix bug [1][2] in Cinder, Cinder needs to use nova/volume/encryptors[3] > to attach/detach encrypted volumes. > > To decrease the code duplication, I raised a BP[4] to move encryptors to > os-brick[5]. > > Once it is

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

Brick does not have to take over the decisions in order to be a useful repository for the code. The motivation for this work is to avoid having the dm setup code copied wholesale into cinder, where it becomes difficult to keep in sync with the code in nova. Cinder needs a copy of this code since

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 02:45:15PM +0200, Duncan Thomas wrote: > Brick does not have to take over the decisions in order to be a useful > repository for the code. The motivation for this work is to avoid having > the dm setup code copied wholesale into cinder, where it becomes difficult > to keep

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

On 11/20/2015 10:19 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 02:45:15PM +0200, Duncan Thomas wrote: Brick does not have to take over the decisions in order to be a useful repository for the code. The motivation for this work is to avoid having the dm setup code copied wholesale

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

On 11/20/2015 01:19 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 02:45:15PM +0200, Duncan Thomas wrote: Brick does not have to take over the decisions in order to be a useful repository for the code. The motivation for this work is to avoid having the dm setup code copied wholesale

[openstack-dev] [Cinder] Mitaka Midcycle Sprint

Cinder Mitaka Midcycle Sprint Dates: January 26-29 (29th will be optional hack day) Location: NetApp Office 7301 Kit Creek Road, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=35.8578%2C-78.8839#map=16/35.8569/-78.8851 Contact: Tom Barron (tbarron) Nearest airport:

[openstack-dev] [cinder][nova]Move encryptors to os-brick

Hi all, To fix bug [1][2] in Cinder, Cinder needs to use nova/volume/encryptors[3] to attach/detach encrypted volumes. To decrease the code duplication, I raised a BP[4] to move encryptors to os-brick[5]. Once it is done, Nova needs to update to use the common library. This is BP raised.

[openstack-dev] [Cinder] Mitaka Design Summit Recap

Cinder Mitaka Design Summit Summary Will the Real Block Storage Service Please Stand Up === Should Cinder be usable outside of a full OpenStack environment. There are several solutions out there for providing a Software Defined Storage service with

[openstack-dev] Cinder mid-cycle planning survey

Hi Folks The Cinder team is trying to plan our mid-cycle meetup again. Can anybody interested in attending please fill out this quick survey to help with planning, please? https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Q5FZX68 Closing date is 11th November. Thanks -- -- Duncan Thomas

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][ThirdPartyCI]CloudFounders OpenvStorage CI - request to re-add the cinder driver

Hi, Trying to get more attention to this ... We had our driver removed by commit: https://github.com/openstack/cinder/commit/f0ab819732d77a8a6dd1a91422ac183ac4894419 due to no CI. Pls let me know if there is something wrong so we can fix it asap so we can have the driver back in M. The CI is

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Specifications to support High Availability Active-Active configurations in Cinder

On Tue, 2015-10-20 at 20:17 +0200, Gorka Eguileor wrote: > Hi, > > We finally have ready for review all specifications required to support > High Availability Active/Active configurations in Cinder's Volume nodes. > > There is a Blueprint to track this effort [1] and the specs are as follow: >

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][ThirdPartyCI]CloudFounders OpenvStorage CI - request to re-add the cinder driver

Hi Have you posted a review to re-add the driver? I can't see one, though I might be missing it. If you have a review posted, please add a link here, but you are in good shape to make the M release. If you don't yet have a review posted, please prepare and submit one using the normal gerrit

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][ThirdPartyCI]CloudFounders OpenvStorage CI - request to re-add the cinder driver

Hi Duncan, here is the review: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/241174 Thanks, Eduard __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][ThirdPartyCI]CloudFounders OpenvStorage CI - request to re-add the cinder driver

Hi, Thanks for the quick reply. What do you mean a review? Should i resubmit the driver code to the cinder repo? Do i need also the driver certification tests? Thanks, Eduard __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][ThirdPartyCI]CloudFounders OpenvStorage CI - request to re-add the cinder driver

Hi Yes, you should resubmit the code to cinder. There is no need to do the certification tests, they are replaced by the CI. On 3 November 2015 at 12:10, Eduard Matei wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for the quick reply. > What do you mean a review? Should i resubmit the

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Cinder Mitaka Deadlines

On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 7:27 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote: > Cinder Release Schedule > > After some discussion at the Mitaka Design Summit, the Cinder team will be > altering our release schedule for this release to simplify deadlines and > closer align with the established

[openstack-dev] [cinder] Cinder Mitaka Deadlines

Cinder Release Schedule After some discussion at the Mitaka Design Summit, the Cinder team will be altering our release schedule for this release to simplify deadlines and closer align with the established OpenStack release schedule. Overall Deadlines for Mitaka [1] * Mitaka-1 (Dec 1-3) *

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova] gate-cinder-python34 failing test_nova_timeout after novaclient 2.33 release

On 10/29/2015 5:55 AM, Andrey Kurilin wrote: >But it was released with 2961e82 which was the backward incompatible requests exception change, which we now have a fix for that we want to release, but would include 0cd5812. I suppose we need to revert 0cd5812 change too, cut new release and

[openstack-dev] [Cinder] Sessions on openstack-cinder YouTube channel

Hey everyone, We recently created a YouTube channel for Cinder related activity. We are hoping to use this to build up a library of recordings over time. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJ8Koy4gsISMy0qW3CWZmaQ Starting with this Summit, Walt Boring has done a lot of work making sure each

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova] gate-cinder-python34 failing test_nova_timeout after novaclient 2.33 release

>But it was released with 2961e82 which was the backward incompatible requests exception change, which we now have a fix for that we want to release, but would include 0cd5812. I suppose we need to revert 0cd5812 change too, cut new release and then revert revert of 0cd5812 :) On Wed, Oct 28,

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova] gate-cinder-python34 failing test_nova_timeout after novaclient 2.33 release

Hi. Look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/239837/ On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > That job is failing at a decent rate, tracking with bug: > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/1510656 > > It lines up with the novaclient 2.33 release

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova] gate-cinder-python34 failing test_nova_timeout after novaclient 2.33 release

On 10/28/2015 9:06 AM, Yuriy Nesenenko wrote: Hi. Look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/239837/ On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Matt Riedemann > wrote: That job is failing at a decent rate, tracking with bug:

[openstack-dev] [cinder][nova] gate-cinder-python34 failing test_nova_timeout after novaclient 2.33 release

That job is failing at a decent rate, tracking with bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/1510656 It lines up with the novaclient 2.33 release on 10/27, I'm checking out what the change was that caused the regression. This is a heads up that rechecks on this failure probably won't

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova] gate-cinder-python34 failing test_nova_timeout after novaclient 2.33 release

On 10/28/2015 9:22 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 10/28/2015 9:06 AM, Yuriy Nesenenko wrote: Hi. Look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/239837/ On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Matt Riedemann > wrote: That job is failing

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] RemoteFS drivers refactoring: move code, which works with images to separate classes

On 10/28/2015 03:55 PM, Eric Harney wrote: On 10/28/2015 03:18 PM, Dmitry Guryanov wrote: Hello! Can we discuss this on the summit? As I promised, I've written a blueprint for this change: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237094/ I assume we can talk about this at the Cinder contributors

[openstack-dev] [cinder][ironic] Cinder + Ironic meetup

Hi team, Let's discuss "Cinder w/o Nova" [1] or "Cinder and Ironic integration" this Friday, 11am at Cinder Contributors Meetup, Amethyst room. This topic is important for our projects and users, so let's discuss it together to find a best solution to implement it. [1]

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] RemoteFS drivers refactoring: move code, which works with images to separate classes

On 10/28/2015 03:18 PM, Dmitry Guryanov wrote: > Hello! > > Can we discuss this on the summit? > > As I promised, I've written a blueprint for this change: > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237094/ > I assume we can talk about this at the Cinder contributors meetup on Friday. > > On

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] RemoteFS drivers refactoring: move code, which works with images to separate classes

Hello! Can we discuss this on the summit? As I promised, I've written a blueprint for this change: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237094/ On 10/14/2015 03:57 AM, Dmitry Guryanov wrote: Hello, RemoteFS drivers combine 2 logical tasks. The first one is how to mount a filesystem and select

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova] gate-cinder-python34 failing test_nova_timeout after novaclient 2.33 release

Matt, Thank you for bring this topic to the ML. In cinder, we've merged [1] patch to unblock gates. I've proposed other patch [2] to fix global-requirements for the stable/liberty branch. [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/239837/ [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/239799/ Regards, Ivan

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova] gate-cinder-python34 failing test_nova_timeout after novaclient 2.33 release

On 10/28/2015 12:28 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 10/28/2015 10:41 AM, Ivan Kolodyazhny wrote: Matt, Thank you for bring this topic to the ML. In cinder, we've merged [1] patch to unblock gates. I've proposed other patch [2] to fix global-requirements for the stable/liberty branch. [1]

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova] gate-cinder-python34 failing test_nova_timeout after novaclient 2.33 release

On 10/28/2015 10:41 AM, Ivan Kolodyazhny wrote: Matt, Thank you for bring this topic to the ML. In cinder, we've merged [1] patch to unblock gates. I've proposed other patch [2] to fix global-requirements for the stable/liberty branch. [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/239837/ [2]

[openstack-dev] [cinder] About the response parameters of the API List volumes

hi, Folks The API: GET/v2/​{tenant_id}​/volumes List volumes When we use the tenant admin to list all the created volumes, we can list all tenant's volumes. But the response parameters do not include the parameter tenant_id. For a administrator, it is reasonable to see the the tenant_id of a

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] meeting place for event Monday night in Tokyo ...

How do we go to venue? On Oct 25, 2015 10:58 AM, "Mike Perez" wrote: > On 15:54 Oct 21, Jay S. Bryant wrote: > > > > > Not sure where the evening will take us, but we are planning to meet > > by registration at the Convention Center. Looking at the map, if I > > am reading

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] about the cinder /volumes and /volumes/detail sort APIs

Thanks. Duncan. It is clear to me. We will plan to update our porject code using new sort API. Best regard.chenying(IRC) ying.c...@huawei.com Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 14:06:58 +0200 From: duncan.tho...@gmail.com To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] about

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] about the cinder /volumes and /volumes/detail sort APIs

The deprecated API will be removed in some future release, though the date for that is not know. It is not advised to code against a deprecated API for this reason, and any existing code that operates against a deprecated API should be updated where possible. That said, the deprecated code in

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] meeting place for event Monday night in Tokyo ...

On Oct 25, 2015, at 18:19, Mike Perez wrote: >> On Oct 25, 2015, at 10:48, Mike Perez wrote: >> >> On 15:54 Oct 21, Jay S. Bryant wrote: >> >> >> >>> Not sure where the evening will take us, but we are planning to meet >>> by registration at the

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] meeting place for event Monday night in Tokyo ...

> On Oct 25, 2015, at 10:48, Mike Perez wrote: > > On 15:54 Oct 21, Jay S. Bryant wrote: > > > >> Not sure where the evening will take us, but we are planning to meet >> by registration at the Convention Center. Looking at the map, if I >> am reading it properly, in front

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] meeting place for event Monday night in Tokyo ...

On Sun, 2015-10-25 at 22:27 +0900, Mike Perez wrote: > On Oct 25, 2015, at 18:19, Mike Perez wrote: > > >> On Oct 25, 2015, at 10:48, Mike Perez wrote: > >> > >> On 15:54 Oct 21, Jay S. Bryant wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>> Not sure where the evening will

[openstack-dev] [cinder] about the cinder /volumes and /volumes/detail sort APIs

hi Folks I find that the v2 /volumes and /volumes/detail sort API has been updated to support multiple sort keys and sort directions using the single 'sort' parameterin this patch[1]. But this patch still supported old API using 'sort_key' and 'sort_dir' parameters which have been

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] meeting place for event Monday night in Tokyo ...

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 02:17:12AM +, Dulko, Michal wrote: > On Sun, 2015-10-25 at 22:27 +0900, Mike Perez wrote: > > On Oct 25, 2015, at 18:19, Mike Perez wrote: > > > > >> On Oct 25, 2015, at 10:48, Mike Perez wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> I

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] meeting place for event Monday night in Tokyo ...

On 15:54 Oct 21, Jay S. Bryant wrote: > Not sure where the evening will take us, but we are planning to meet > by registration at the Convention Center. Looking at the map, if I > am reading it properly, in front of the Huawei Community Lounge on > the first floor looks like a good place to

[openstack-dev] [cinder] No meeting Oct 28th

It seems someone always asks during the Summit, so this is an attempt to make sure it is known. Due to the Design Summit taking place next week, Cinder will not be holding its regular Wednesday meeting. We will resume normal meetings the following week. Thanks! Sean McGinnis (smcginnis)

[openstack-dev] [cinder] meeting place for event Monday night in Tokyo ...

All, As has been our custom during previous summits, the Cinder team would will be getting together for dinner and drinks on Monday night (11/26) at the Tokyo Summit. Not sure where the evening will take us, but we are planning to meet by registration at the Convention Center. Looking at

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] meeting place for event Monday night in Tokyo ...

On 10/21/2015 05:04 PM, Jay S. Bryant wrote: > > > On 10/21/2015 04:00 PM, Anita Kuno wrote: >> On 10/21/2015 04:54 PM, Jay S. Bryant wrote: >>> All, >>> >>> As has been our custom during previous summits, the Cinder team would >>> will be getting together for dinner and drinks on Monday night

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] meeting place for event Monday night in Tokyo ...

On 10/21/2015 04:54 PM, Jay S. Bryant wrote: > All, > > As has been our custom during previous summits, the Cinder team would > will be getting together for dinner and drinks on Monday night (11/26) > at the Tokyo Summit. > > Not sure where the evening will take us, but we are planning to meet

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] meeting place for event Monday night in Tokyo ...

On 10/21/2015 04:00 PM, Anita Kuno wrote: On 10/21/2015 04:54 PM, Jay S. Bryant wrote: All, As has been our custom during previous summits, the Cinder team would will be getting together for dinner and drinks on Monday night (11/26) at the Tokyo Summit. Not sure where the evening will take

[openstack-dev] [cinder] Specifications to support High Availability Active-Active configurations in Cinder

Hi, We finally have ready for review all specifications required to support High Availability Active/Active configurations in Cinder's Volume nodes. There is a Blueprint to track this effort [1] and the specs are as follow: - General description of the issues and solutions [2] - Removal of

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] NFS mount as cinder user instead of root

located space in the driver itself because the scheduler would be making all share placement decisions. But as things stand, the driver itself must select among multiple shares and therefore needs to take the amount of committed space into account, not just the amount currently consumed. -- Tom > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] New extension API for detecting cinder-backup ?

On Fri, 2015-10-16 at 17:36 +, Ramakrishna, Deepti wrote: > Thanks Duncan. > > Should I publish a BP and spec for this? And follow it up with code > changes to the server, client, horizon and documentation? > > Thanks, > Deepti > I believe a BP and spec is required as this is a new

[openstack-dev] [cinder] Rolling upgrades - missing pieces

Hi all, One of our priority goals for Liberty was the adoption of oslo.versionedobjects in order for Cinder to achieve ability to do rolling upgrades. We weren't successful with that in L, and work got postponed to Mitaka. I want to highlight remaining work in that topic as well as other pieces

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Rolling upgrades - missing pieces

On Mon, 2015-10-19 at 11:19 -0500, Sean McGinnis wrote: > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 03:10:16PM +, Dulko, Michal wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > One of our priority goals for Liberty was the adoption of > > oslo.versionedobjects in order for Cinder to achieve ability to do > > rolling upgrades. We

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] RemoteFS drivers refactoring: move code, which works with images to separate classes

Mailing List; Maxim Nestratov Subject: [openstack-dev] [cinder] RemoteFS drivers refactoring: move code, which works with images to separate classes Hello, RemoteFS drivers combine 2 logical tasks. The first one is how to mount a filesystem and select proper share for a new or existing volume

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Rolling upgrades - missing pieces

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 03:10:16PM +, Dulko, Michal wrote: > Hi all, > > One of our priority goals for Liberty was the adoption of > oslo.versionedobjects in order for Cinder to achieve ability to do > rolling upgrades. We weren't successful with that in L, and work got > postponed to Mitaka.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] New extension API for detecting cinder-backup ?

: Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] New extension API for detecting cinder-backup ? I think option 2 is the better one, and we can just call it something else other than capabilities. Available_services or similar On 16 Oct 2015 11:05, "Ramakrishna, Deepti" <deepti.ramakris

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] New extension API for detecting cinder-backup ?

I think option 2 is the better one, and we can just call it something else other than capabilities. Available_services or similar On 16 Oct 2015 11:05, "Ramakrishna, Deepti" wrote: > Hi, > > > > We need a way to let Horizon know about the presence of cinder-backup >

[openstack-dev] [Cinder] New extension API for detecting cinder-backup ?

Hi, We need a way to let Horizon know about the presence of cinder-backup service so that it can enable the volume backup operations in the UI (https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/1334856). The backup action does not have any restrictions on who can perform it as evidenced by the following

[openstack-dev] [cinder] Is there any cli command for "manage_existing"?

Hi, I have saw the "manage_existing" interface in cinder/contrib/volume_manager.py but can't find the responding cli command. Is there any cli command for "manage_existing"? If not, who will call this api? Thanks for any input! Wilson Liu

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Is there any cli command for "manage_existing"?

Hi, There is "cinder manage" command [1] in the python-cinderclient. [1] https://github.com/openstack/python-cinderclient/blob/master/cinderclient/v2/shell.py#L2063 Regards, Ivan Kolodyazhny On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 1:06 PM, liuxinguo wrote: > Hi, > > I have saw the

Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Is there any cli command for "manage_existing"?

As Ivan mentioned, it's "cinder manage" but it's an admin only command. Make sure you're running it with admin privileges. -Ben Swartzlander On 10/16/2015 06:06 AM, liuxinguo wrote: Hi, I have saw the “manage_existing” interface in cinder/contrib/volume_manager.py but can’t find the

[openstack-dev] cinder authentication with authtoken

Hi, I need a way to access cinder apis using auth-token. I used below API to get the cinder client and tried getting the availability zones. cinder_client = cc.Client(1, auth_token=self.ctxt.auth_token, project_id=self.ctxt.tenant,

<    7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   >