Re: [openstack-dev] multi-attach-volume for rbd
Multi-attach also happens during VM migration: (attach volume to destination host, move VM to destination host, detach volume from source host). It's not clear if rbd's limitation affects this as well - it's not clear from the bug report or the patch. On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 1:30 AM, Matt Riedemann <mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > On 12/14/2016 3:53 PM, Shane Peters wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> Per https://review.openstack.org/#/c/283695/ multi-attach was disabled >> for rbd volumes. >> >> Does anyone know what features are missing or aren't compatible in rbd >> for it to support multi-attach? >> >> Thanks >> Shane >> >> >> >> __ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscrib >> e >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> > Nova doesn't support multiattach volumes for any Cinder backend. That's > being worked by the Nova and Cinder teams but won't be something that's > implemented on the Nova side in the Ocata release, and will be a stretch > probably for Pike. There are weekly meetings about this though, see: > > http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#Cinder,_Nova > > -- > > Thanks, > > Matt Riedemann > > > __ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > -- *Avishay Traeger, PhD* *System Architect* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web <http://www.stratoscale.com/> | Blog <http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/Stratoscale> | Google+ <https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts> | Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale> __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] moving driver to open source
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Alon Marx <alo...@il.ibm.com> wrote: > > From deployment stand point the desire is to have any piece of code that > is required on an openstack installation would be easily downloadable. > And redistributable please. -- *Avishay Traeger, PhD* *System Architect* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web <http://www.stratoscale.com/> | Blog <http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/Stratoscale> | Google+ <https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts> | Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale> __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] Periodically checking Glance image files
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 7:16 AM, Nikhil Komawar <nik.koma...@gmail.com> wrote: > Firstly, I'd like to mention that Glance is built-in (and if deployed > correctly) is self-resilient in ensuring that you do NOT need an audit > of such files. In fact, if any operator (particularly large scale > operator) needs such a system we have a serious issue where > potentially > important /user/ data is likely to be lost resulting in legal > issues (so > please beware). Can you please elaborate on how Glance is self-resilient? Hey Sergio, > > > Glad to know that you're not having any feature related issues (to me > this is a good sign). Based on your answers, it makes sense to require a > reliability solution for backend data (or some sort of health monitoring > for the user data). > All backends will at some point lose some data. The ask is for reflecting the image's "health" to the user. > So, I wonder what your thoughts are for such an audit system. At a first > glance, this looks rather not scalable, at least if you plan to do the > audit on all of the active images. Consider a deployment trying to run > this for around 100-500K active image records. This will need to be run > in batches, thus completing the list of records and saying that you've > done a full audit of the active image -- is a NP-complete problem (new > images can be introduced, some images can be updated in the meantime, etc.) > NP-complete? Really? Every storage system scrubs all data periodically to protect from disk errors. Glance images should be relatively static anyway. > The failure rate is low, so a random (sparse check) on the image data > won't help either. Would a cron job setup to do the audit for smaller > deployments work? May be we can look into some known cron solutions to > do the trick? > How about letting the backend report the health? S3, for example, reports an event on object loss <http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/NotificationHowTo.html#supported-notification-event-types>. The S3 driver could monitor those events and update status. Swift performs scrubbing to determine object health - I haven't checked if it reports an event on object loss, but don't see any reason not to. For local filesystem, it would need its own scrubbing process (e.g., recalculate hash for each object every N days). On the other hand if it is a mount of some filer, the filer should be able to report on health. Thanks, Avishay -- *Avishay Traeger, PhD* *System Architect* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web <http://www.stratoscale.com/> | Blog <http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/Stratoscale> | Google+ <https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts> | Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale> __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] moving driver to open source
On Sep 9, 2016 18:13, "Duncan Thomas" > So my issue is not with any of those things, it is that I believe anybody should be able to put together a distribution of openstack, that just works, which any supported backend, without needed to negotiate licensing deals with vendors, and without having to have nasty hacks in their installers that pull things down off the web on to cinder nodes to get around licensing rules. That is one of the main 'opens' to me in openstack. > > I don't care so much whether your CLI or API proxy in open or closed source, but I really do care if I can create a distribution, even a novel one, with that software in it, without hitting licensing issues. That is, as I see it, a bare minimum - anything less than that and it does not belong in the cinder source tree. As someone who ships a product that uses these drivers, I can definitely identity with this. Finding the software, and verifying its license, is at times not simple for someone who hasn't purchased the product. I personally don't care if the source code is available, I care that it's readily available for download and can be distributed. __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] moving driver to open source
There are a number of drivers that require closed-source tools to communicate with the storage. 3 others that I've come across recently: - EMC VNX: requires Navisphere CLI v7.32 or higher - Hitachi storage volume driver: requires RAID Manager Ver 01-32-03/01 or later for VSP G1000/VSP/HUS VM, Hitachi Storage Navigator Modular 2 (HSNM2) Ver 27.50 or later for HUS 100 Family - Infortrend driver: requires raidcmd ESDS10 Many appliances support REST, SSH, or something similar, but some still use proprietary protocols/tools available only as binaries to customers. Thanks, Avishay On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Matt Riedemann <mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > On 9/7/2016 8:47 AM, John Griffith wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Alon Marx <alo...@il.ibm.com >> <mailto:alo...@il.ibm.com>> wrote: >> >> I want to share our plans to open the IBM Storage driver source >> code. Historically we started our way in cinder way back (in Essex >> if I'm not mistaken) >> >> You're mistaken, Cinder didn't exist at that time... but it's irrelevant. >> >> >> >> with just a small piece of code in the community while keeping most >> of the driver code closed. Since then the code has grown, but we >> kept with the same format. We would like now to open the driver >> source code, while keeping the connectivity to the storage as closed >> source. >> >> It might help to know *which* driver you are referring to. IBM has a >> number of Storwiz and GPFS drivers in Cinder... what drivers are you >> referring to here? >> >> >> >> I believe that there are other cinder drivers that have some stuff >> in proprietary libraries. >> >> Actually we've had a hard stance on this, if you have code in Cinder >> that requires an external lib (I personally hate this model) we >> typically require it to be open source. >> >> I want to propose and formalize the principles to where we draw the >> line (this has also been discussed in >> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/341780/ >> <https://review.openstack.org/#/c/341780/>) on what's acceptable by >> the community. >> >> >> >> >> Based on previous discussion I understand that the rule of thumb is >> "as long as the majority of the driver logic is in the public >> driver" the community would be fine with that. Is this acceptable to >> the community? >> >> No, I don't think that's true. It's quite possible that some people >> make those sorts of statements but frankly their missing the entire point. >> >> In case you weren't aware, OpenStack IS an OPEN SOURCE project, not a >> proprietary or hybrid project. We are VERY clear as a community about >> that fact and what we call the "4 Opens" [1]. It's my opinion that if >> you're in then you're ALL in. >> >> [1]: https://governance.openstack.org/reference/opens.html >> >> >> >> >> Regards, >> Alon >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> __ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: >> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >> <http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >> > >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev> >> >> >> >> >> >> __ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscrib >> e >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> > I'm assuming this is the XIV driver which is a shim: > > https://github.com/openstack/cinder/blob/master/cinder/volum > e/drivers/ibm/ibm_storage.py > > As for the open source part of it, vcenter isn't open source but there is > a vmdk driver to talk to it, I imagine this is similar. > > -- > > Thanks, > > Matt Riedemann > > > __ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi
Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][drivers] Backend and volume health reporting
On Sun, Aug 14, 2016 at 5:53 PM, John Griffith <john.griffi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I'd like to get a more detailed use case and example of a problem you > want to solve with this. I have a number of concerns including those I > raised in your "list manageable volumes" proposal. Most importantly > there's really no clear definition of what these fields mean and how they > should be interpreted. > I didn't specify what anything means yet on purpose - the idea was to first gather information here about what various backends can report, then we make an educated decision about what health states make sense to expose. I see Cinder's potential as a single pane of glass management for all of my cloud's storage. Once I do some initial configuration, I hope to look at the backend's UI as little as possible. Today a user can create a volume, but can't know anything about it's resiliency or availability. The user has a volume that's "available" and is happy. But what does the user really care about? In my opinion not Cinder's internal state machine, but things like "Is my data safe?" and "Is my data accessible?" That's the problem that I want to solve here. > For backends, I'm not sure what you want to solve that can't be handled > already by the scheduler and report-capabilities periodic job? You can > already report back from your backend to the scheduler that you shouldn't > be used for any scheduling activities going forward. More detailed info > than that might be useful, but I'm not sure it wouldn't fall into an > already existing OpenStack monitoring project like Monasca? > My storage requires maintenance and now all volumes are unaccessible. I have management access and create as many volumes as I want, but no attach. Or the storage is down totally. Or it is up but performance/reliability is degraded due to rebuilds in progress. Or multiple disks failed, and I lost data from 100 volumes. In all these cases, all I see is that my volumes are available/in-use. To have any real insight into what is going on the admin has to go to the storage backend and use vendor-specific APIs to find out. Why not abstract these APIs as well, to allow the admin to monitor the storage? It can be as simple as "Hey, there's a problem, your volumes aren't accessible - go look at the backend's UI" - without going into details. Do you propose every vendor write a Monasca plugin? It doesn't seem to be in line with their goal... As far as volumes, I personally don't think volumes should have more than a > few states. They're either "ok" and available for an operation or they're > not. > I agree. In my opinion volumes have way too many states today. But that's another topic. What I am proposing is not new states, or a new state machine, but rather a simple health property: volume['health'] = "healthy", volume['health'] = "error". Whatever the backend reports. > The list you have seems ok to me, but I don't see a ton of value in fault > prediction or going to great lengths to avoid something failing. The > current model we have of a volume being "ok" until it's "not" seems > perfectly reasonable to me. Typically my experience is that trying to be > clever and polling/monitoring to try and preemptively change the status of > a volume does little more than result in complexity, confusion and false > status changes of resources. I'm pretty strongly opposed to having a level > of granularity of the volume here. At least for now, I'd rather see what > you have in mind for the backend and nail that down to something that's > solid and basically bullet proof before trying to tackle thousands of > volumes which have transient states. And of course the biggest question I > have still "what problem" you hope to solve here? > This is not about fault prediction, or preemptive changes, or anything fancy like that. It's simply reporting on the current health. "You have lost the data in this volume, sorry". "Don't bother trying to attach this volume right now, it's not accessible." "The storage is currently doing something with your volume and performance will suck." I don't know exactly what we want to expose - I'd rather answer that after getting feedback from vendors about what information is available. But providing some real, up to date, health status on storage resources is a big value for customers. Thanks, Avishay -- *Avishay Traeger, PhD* *System Architect* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web <http://www.stratoscale.com/> | Blog <http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/Stratoscale> | Google+ <https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts> | Linked
[openstack-dev] [cinder][drivers] Backend and volume health reporting
Hi all, I would like to propose working on a new feature for Ocata to provide health information for Cinder backends and volumes. Currently, a volume's status basically reflects the last management operation performed on it - it will be in error state only as a result of a failed management operation. There is no indication as to whether or not a backend or volume is "healthy" - i.e., the data exists and is accessible. The basic idea would be to add a "health" property for both backends and volumes. For backends, this may be something like: - "healthy" - "warning" (something is wrong and the admin should check the storage) - "management unavailable" (there is no management connectivity) - "data unavailable" (there is no data path connectivity) For volumes: - "healthy" - "degraded" (i.e., not at full redundancy) - "error" (in case of a data loss event) - "management unavailable" (there is no management connectivity) - "data unavailable" (there is no data path connectivity) Before I start working on a spec, I wanted to get some feedback, especially from driver owners: 1. What useful information can you provide at the backend level? 2. And at the volume level? 3. How would you obtain this information? Querying the storage (poll)? Registering for events? Something else? 4. Other feedback? Thank you, Avishay -- *Avishay Traeger, PhD* *System Architect* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web <http://www.stratoscale.com/> | Blog <http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/Stratoscale> | Google+ <https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts> | Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale> __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [swift] Hummingbird Roadmap
Hi all, I was wondering what the roadmap for Hummingbird is. Will development continue? Will support continue? Is it expected to reach feature parity or even replace the Python code? Thank you, Avishay -- *Avishay Traeger, PhD* *System Architect* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web <http://www.stratoscale.com/> | Blog <http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/Stratoscale> | Google+ <https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts> | Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale> __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Cinder] Multi-attach, determining when to call os-brick's connector.disconnect_volume
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Daniel P. Berrange <berra...@redhat.com> wrote: > As above, we need to solve this more generally than just multi-attach, > even single-attach is flawed today. > Agreed. This is what I was getting at. Because we have at least 3 different types of attach being handled the same way, we are getting into tricky situations. (3 types: iSCSI/FC attach volume to host, Ceph attach volume to VM, NFS attach pool to host) Multi-attach just makes a bad situation worse. -- *Avishay Traeger, PhD* *System Architect* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web <http://www.stratoscale.com/> | Blog <http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/Stratoscale> | Google+ <https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts> | Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale> __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Cinder] Multi-attach, determining when to call os-brick's connector.disconnect_volume
sumer of the Target. > > My view is that maybe we should look at addressing the multiple use of a > single target case in Nova, and then absolutely figure out how to make > things work correctly on the Cinder side for all the different behaviors > that may occur on the Cinder side from the various vendors. > > Make sense? > > John > > __ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > -- *Avishay Traeger, PhD* *System Architect* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web <http://www.stratoscale.com/> | Blog <http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/Stratoscale> | Google+ <https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts> | Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale> __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Cinder] Cleanly detaching volumes from failed nodes
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 6:38 PM, Walter A. Boring IV <walter.bor...@hpe.com> wrote: > My plan was to store the connector object at attach_volume time. I was > going to add an additional column to the cinder volume attachment table > that stores the connector that came from nova. The problem is live > migration. After live migration the connector is out of date. Cinder > doesn't have an existing API to update attachment. That will have to be > added, so that the connector info can be updated. > We have needed this for force detach for some time now. > > It's on my list, but most likely not until N, or at least not until the > microversions land in Cinder. > Walt > I think live migration should probably just be a second attachment - during the migration you have two attachments, then you detach the first. I think this is correct because as far as Cinder and the storage is concerned, there are two attachments. I think most of this mess started because we were trying to make the volume status reflect the status in Cinder and Nova. If the status reflects only Cinder's (and the storage backends') status, things because simpler. (Might need to pass an extra flag on the second attach to over-ride any "no multiattach" policies that exist.) -- *Avishay Traeger, PhD* *System Architect* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web <http://www.stratoscale.com/> | Blog <http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/Stratoscale> | Google+ <https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts> | Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale> __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Cinder] Cleanly detaching volumes from failed nodes
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:01 PM, Matt Riedemann <mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > I've replied on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/266095/ and the related > cinder change https://review.openstack.org/#/c/272899/ which are adding a > new key to the volume connector dict being passed around between nova and > cinder, which is not ideal. > > I'd really like to see us start modeling the volume connector with > versioned objects so we can (1) tell what's actually in this mystery > connector dict in the nova virt driver interface and (2) handle version > compat with adding new keys to it. > I agree with you. Actually, I think it would be more correct to have Cinder store it, and not pass it at all to terminate_connection(). -- *Avishay Traeger, PhD* *System Architect* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web <http://www.stratoscale.com/> | Blog <http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/Stratoscale> | Google+ <https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts> | Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale> __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Cinder] Cleanly detaching volumes from failed nodes
OK great, thanks! I added a suggestion to the etherpad as well, and found this link helpful: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/266095/ On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 1:37 AM, D'Angelo, Scott <scott.dang...@hpe.com> wrote: > There is currently no simple way to clean up Cinder attachments if the > Nova node (or the instance) has gone away. We’ve put this topic on the > agenda for the Cinder mid-cycle this week: > > https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/mitaka-cinder-midcycle L#113 > > > > *From:* Avishay Traeger [mailto:avis...@stratoscale.com] > *Sent:* Monday, January 25, 2016 7:21 AM > *To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > *Subject:* [openstack-dev] [Nova][Cinder] Cleanly detaching volumes from > failed nodes > > > > Hi all, > > I was wondering if there was any way to cleanly detach volumes from failed > nodes. In the case where the node is up nova-compute will call Cinder's > terminate_connection API with a "connector" that includes information about > the node - e.g., hostname, IP, iSCSI initiator name, FC WWPNs, etc. > > If the node has died, this information is no longer available, and so the > attachment cannot be cleaned up properly. Is there any way to handle this > today? If not, does it make sense to save the connector elsewhere (e.g., > DB) for cases like these? > > > > Thanks, > > Avishay > > > > -- > > *Avishay Traeger, PhD* > > *System Architect* > > > > Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 > > E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com > > > > > > Web <http://www.stratoscale.com/> | Blog > <http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/> | Twitter > <https://twitter.com/Stratoscale> | Google+ > <https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts> > | Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale> > > ______ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > -- *Avishay Traeger, PhD* *System Architect* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web <http://www.stratoscale.com/> | Blog <http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/Stratoscale> | Google+ <https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts> | Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale> __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [Nova][Cinder] Cleanly detaching volumes from failed nodes
Hi all, I was wondering if there was any way to cleanly detach volumes from failed nodes. In the case where the node is up nova-compute will call Cinder's terminate_connection API with a "connector" that includes information about the node - e.g., hostname, IP, iSCSI initiator name, FC WWPNs, etc. If the node has died, this information is no longer available, and so the attachment cannot be cleaned up properly. Is there any way to handle this today? If not, does it make sense to save the connector elsewhere (e.g., DB) for cases like these? Thanks, Avishay -- *Avishay Traeger, PhD* *System Architect* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web <http://www.stratoscale.com/> | Blog <http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/> | Twitter <https://twitter.com/Stratoscale> | Google+ <https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts> | Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale> __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] A possible solution for HA Active-Active
On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 2:51 AM, Monty Taylor mord...@inaugust.com wrote: I hear tell that there a bunch of ops people who are in love with consul At my company we love Consul. We found it to be very scalable and performant, gives us an easy-to-use k/v store, membership service, DNS, etc. We use it to load balance requests to our services and route requests to active instances, including to openstack and mariadb+galera. That said, I don't know if something like Consul, etcd, or zookeeper need to be part of openstack itself, or just part of the deployment (unless we decide to store metadata in a kv store in place of the SQL DB - which is entirely possible with some adjustments to openstack). I find it hard to believe that Cinder really needs distributed locks. AFAIU, there is one lock in the non-driver Cinder code to solve a race between deleting a volume and creating a snapshot/clone from it. You can solve that with other methods. I already proposed to use garbage collection for deleting volumes - you can delete offline and before deleting easily check the DB if there is an ongoing operation with the given volume as a source. If yes, just wait. The bulk of the locks seem to be in the drivers. I find it hard to believe that the management APIs of so many storage products cannot be called concurrently. I think we could solve many issues in Cinder with some requirements on drivers, such as that they need to be able to run active-active with no distributed locks. Another requirement of idempotency would significantly ease recovery pains I believe. I very much agree with Mike's statement that Cinder isn't as complex as people are making it. Well maybe it is, but it doesn't need to be. :-) -- *Avishay Traeger, PhD* *Architect* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web http://www.stratoscale.com/ | Blog http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/ | Twitter https://twitter.com/Stratoscale | Google+ https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts | Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][oslo] Locks for create from volume/snapshot
On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Duncan Thomas duncan.tho...@gmail.com wrote: We need mutual exclusion for several operations. Whether that is done by entity queues, locks, state based locking at the api later, or something else, we need mutual exclusion. Our current api does not lend itself to looser consistency, and I struggle to come up with a sane api that does - nobody doing an operation on a volume wants it to happen maybe, at some time... What about deletes? They can happen later on, which can help in these situations I think. -- *Avishay Traeger* *Storage RD* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web http://www.stratoscale.com/ | Blog http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/ | Twitter https://twitter.com/Stratoscale | Google+ https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts | Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][oslo] Locks for create from volume/snapshot
...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- *Avishay Traeger* *Storage RD* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web http://www.stratoscale.com/ | Blog http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/ | Twitter https://twitter.com/Stratoscale | Google+ https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts | Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [tempest][qa][cinder] How to configure tempest with to test volume migration?
Good to see that you will work on this! In addition to the cases that Duncan mentioned, there is also the case of moving a volume between two pools within the same backend. This probably complicates the setup even further. On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Duncan Thomas duncan.tho...@gmail.com wrote: There doesn't seem to be an existing tempest test for this. I suggest writing the test so that it looks if there are two volume types defined, and if so uses them. Ideally you should test migration to and from lvm. There is offline migration (volume is available) and online migration (volume is attached), which are two completely separate code paths. Great to hear somebody I'd writing tests for this! On 25 May 2015 10:24, Sheng Bo Hou sb...@cn.ibm.com wrote: Hi everyone, I am planning to add test cases for volume migration for cinder into tempest. I am wondering how to enable multiple back-ends for cinder in tempest, and connect to different back-ends. For example, I configure one back-end for LVM and the other is for IBM Storwize V7000 driver. Then run the test named like test_volume_migration_LVM_Storwize to test if the migration really works fine. About the configuration, is this something tempest can do so far? Or is this something new we need to add? Thank you very much. Best wishes, Vincent Hou (侯胜博) Staff Software Engineer, Open Standards and Open Source Team, Emerging Technology Institute, IBM China Software Development Lab Tel: 86-10-82450778 Fax: 86-10-82453660 Notes ID: Sheng Bo Hou/China/IBM@IBMCNE-mail: sb...@cn.ibm.com Address:3F Ring, Building 28 Zhongguancun Software Park, 8 Dongbeiwang West Road, Haidian District, Beijing, P.R.C.100193 地址:北京市海淀区东北旺西路8号中关村软件园28号楼环宇大厦3层 邮编：100193 __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- *Avishay Traeger* *Storage RD* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web http://www.stratoscale.com/ | Blog http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/ | Twitter https://twitter.com/Stratoscale | Google+ https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts | Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Some Changes to Cinder Core
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 2:34 AM, Mike Perez thin...@gmail.com wrote: I would like to recognize Avishay Traeger for his contributions, and now unfortunately departure from the Cinder core team. Unfortunately I have been unable to participate in fully due to additional obligations and therefore it is time to step down. It was a pleasure serving on the Cinder core team. I will still be around, and am not leaving the community. I wish Mike and the Cinder team the best of luck. Cheers, Avishay __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] Cinder Third-Party CI: what next? (was Re: [cinder] Request exemption for removal of NetApp FC drivers (no voting CI))
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 9:23 PM, Anita Kuno ante...@anteaya.info wrote: I'm really disappointed that there hasn't been more support for Mike in this process. I can see how everyone thought I was the problem last year when I had to endure this kind of treatment in Neutron, but I would think after seeing the exact same kind of behaviour a second time folks might be starting to see the pattern. This CI is in my opinion one of the most important undertakings in Cinder to date. Cinder is basically an abstraction over a set of drivers, so testing those drivers is very important. This is especially true for those that deploy OpenStack at various customer sites, each with different hardware, and up to now just had to pray that things worked. The discussion about the CI has been going on forever. Mike brought it up so many times in every forum possible and did a great job with this difficult task. While I understand that setting this up is not a simple task, I think there was enough time. We have been discussing this CI forever, and if action is not taken now, it will never happen. This is not the end of the world for drivers that are removed. Some drivers are already hosted in their own github repos as well as in Cinder's, so vendors can go with that route. Or maybe there will be an exception made to allow backports for removed drivers (I'm not sure this is a good idea). Anyway, I'm very happy to finally have a release where I know that all drivers are more-or-less working. Kudos to Mike, and to all of the Cinder folks that pioneered the effort and provided support to those that followed. -- *Avishay Traeger* *Storage RD* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web http://www.stratoscale.com/ | Blog http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/ | Twitter https://twitter.com/Stratoscale | Google+ https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts | Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][horizon]Proper error handling/propagation to UI
Sorry, I meant to say that the expected behavior is that volumes are independent entities, and therefore you should be able to delete a snapshot even if it has volumes created from it (just like you should be able to delete a volume that has clones from it). The exception is that Cinder will not permit you to delete a volume that has snapshots. On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Eduard Matei eduard.ma...@cloudfounders.com wrote: @Duncan: I tried with lvmdriver-1, fails with error: ImageCopyFailure: Failed to copy image to volume: qemu-img: /dev/mapper/stack--volumes--lvmdriver--1-volume--e8323fc5--8ce4--4676--bbec--0a85efd866fc: error while converting raw: Could not open device: Permission denied It's been configured with 2 drivers (ours, and lvmdriver), but our driver works, so not sure where it fails. Eduard On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Eduard Matei eduard.ma...@cloudfounders.com wrote: Thanks @Duncan: I'll try with the lvm driver. @Avishay, i'm not trying to delete a volume created from a snapshot, i'm trying to delete a snapshot that has volumes created from it (actually i need to prevent this action and properly report the cause of the failure: SnapshotIsBusy). Eduard On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 7:57 AM, Avishay Traeger avis...@stratoscale.com wrote: Deleting a volume created from a snapshot is permitted. Performing operations on a volume created from snapshot should have the same behavior as volumes created from volumes, images, or empty (no source). In all of these cases, the volume should be deleted, regardless of where it came from. Independence from source is one of the differences between volumes and snapshots in Cinder. The driver must take care to ensure this. As to your question about propagating errors without changing an object's state, that is unfortunately not doable in Cinder today (or any other OpenStack project as far as I know). The object's state is currently the only mechanism for reporting an operation's success or failure. On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 6:07 PM, Duncan Thomas duncan.tho...@gmail.com wrote: I thought that case should be caught well before it gets to the driver. Can you retry with the LVM driver please? On 27 February 2015 at 10:48, Eduard Matei eduard.ma...@cloudfounders.com wrote: Hi, We've been testing our cinder driver extensively and found a strange behavior in the UI: - when trying to delete a snapshot that has clones (created volume from snapshot) and error is raised in our driver which turns into error_deleting in cinder and the UI; further actions on that snapshot are impossible from the ui, the user has to go to CLI and do cinder snapshot-reset-state to be able to delete it (after having deleted the clones) - to help with that we implemented a check in the driver and now we raise exception.SnapshotIsBusy; now the snapshot remains available (as it should be) but no error bubble is shown in the UI (only the green one: Success. Scheduled deleting of...). So the user has to go to c-vol screen and check the cause of the error So question: how should we handle this so that a. The snapshot remains in state available b. An error bubble is shown in the UI stating the cause. Thanks, Eduard -- *Eduard Biceri Matei, Senior Software Developer* www.cloudfounders.com | eduard.ma...@cloudfounders.com *CloudFounders, The Private Cloud Software Company* Disclaimer: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the named addressee or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the named addressee, you are hereby notified that you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this email in error we request you to notify us by reply e-mail and to delete all electronic files of the message. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the content of this message, and shall have no liability for any loss or damage suffered by the user, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Duncan Thomas
Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][horizon]Proper error handling/propagation to UI
Deleting a volume created from a snapshot is permitted. Performing operations on a volume created from snapshot should have the same behavior as volumes created from volumes, images, or empty (no source). In all of these cases, the volume should be deleted, regardless of where it came from. Independence from source is one of the differences between volumes and snapshots in Cinder. The driver must take care to ensure this. As to your question about propagating errors without changing an object's state, that is unfortunately not doable in Cinder today (or any other OpenStack project as far as I know). The object's state is currently the only mechanism for reporting an operation's success or failure. On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 6:07 PM, Duncan Thomas duncan.tho...@gmail.com wrote: I thought that case should be caught well before it gets to the driver. Can you retry with the LVM driver please? On 27 February 2015 at 10:48, Eduard Matei eduard.ma...@cloudfounders.com wrote: Hi, We've been testing our cinder driver extensively and found a strange behavior in the UI: - when trying to delete a snapshot that has clones (created volume from snapshot) and error is raised in our driver which turns into error_deleting in cinder and the UI; further actions on that snapshot are impossible from the ui, the user has to go to CLI and do cinder snapshot-reset-state to be able to delete it (after having deleted the clones) - to help with that we implemented a check in the driver and now we raise exception.SnapshotIsBusy; now the snapshot remains available (as it should be) but no error bubble is shown in the UI (only the green one: Success. Scheduled deleting of...). So the user has to go to c-vol screen and check the cause of the error So question: how should we handle this so that a. The snapshot remains in state available b. An error bubble is shown in the UI stating the cause. Thanks, Eduard -- *Eduard Biceri Matei, Senior Software Developer* www.cloudfounders.com | eduard.ma...@cloudfounders.com *CloudFounders, The Private Cloud Software Company* Disclaimer: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the named addressee or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the named addressee, you are hereby notified that you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this email in error we request you to notify us by reply e-mail and to delete all electronic files of the message. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the content of this message, and shall have no liability for any loss or damage suffered by the user, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Duncan Thomas __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- *Avishay Traeger* *Storage RD* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web http://www.stratoscale.com/ | Blog http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/ | Twitter https://twitter.com/Stratoscale | Google+ https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts | Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] what code in cinder volume driver supports volume migration between two backends of same type but having different volume types? [cinder]
Nikesh, The case you are trying is supposed to fail. You have a volume of type dothill_realstor1 which is defined to say this volume must be on backend DotHill_RealStor1. This is a requirement that you defined for that volume. Now you want to migrate it to realstor2, which is a violation of the requirement that you specified. To migrate it, you should change the volume type (retype), which changes the requirement. Thanks, Avishay On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Nikesh Kumar Mahalka nikeshmaha...@vedams.com wrote: I tried below link for volume migration on my driver and also similar efforts for LVM. Even whatever documents available in openstack for volume-migration,each one showing volume migration of a volume having volume type None I added host assisted volume migration function in my cinder driver. When i am trying volume migration on a volume without volume type,then my volume migration function is getting called and i am able to do volume migration. But when i am trying volume migration on a volume having volume type,then my volume migration function is not getting called. http://paste.openstack.org/show/183392/ http://paste.openstack.org/show/183405/ On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 12:31 AM, Nikesh Kumar Mahalka nikeshmaha...@vedams.com wrote: do cinder retype (v2) works for lvm? How to use cinder retype? I tried for volume migration from one volume-type LVM backend to another volume-type LVM backend.But its failed. How can i acheive this? Similarly i am writing a cinder volume driver for my array and want to migrate volume from one volume type to another volume type for my array backends. so want to know how can i achieve this in cinder driver? Regards Nikesh __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- *Avishay Traeger* *Storage RD* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web http://www.stratoscale.com/ | Blog http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/ | Twitter https://twitter.com/Stratoscale | Google+ https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts | Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [all][oslo.db][nova] TL; DR Things everybody should know about Galera
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 11:00 PM, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.net wrote: On 5 February 2015 at 10:24, Joshua Harlow harlo...@outlook.com wrote: How interesting, Why are people using galera if it behaves like this? :-/ Because its actually fairly normal. In fact its an instance of point 7 on https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/BasicDesignTenets - one of our oldest wiki pages :). When I hear MySQL I don't exactly think of eventual consistency (#7), scalability (#1), horizontal scalability (#4), etc. For the past few months I have been advocating implementing an alternative to db/sqlalchemy, but of course it's a huge undertaking. NoSQL (or even distributed key-value stores) should be considered IMO. Just some food for thought :) -- *Avishay Traeger* *Storage RD* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web http://www.stratoscale.com/ | Blog http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/ | Twitter https://twitter.com/Stratoscale | Google+ https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts | Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] what code in cinder volume driver supports volume migration between two backends of same type but having different volume types?
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Nikesh Kumar Mahalka nikeshmaha...@vedams.com wrote: do cinder retype (v2) works for lvm? How to use cinder retype? As far as I remember, LVM doesn't really leverage volume types. What types did you define, and what command are you running? I tried for volume migration from one volume-type LVM backend to another volume-type LVM backend.But its failed. How can i acheive this? It should work. Please provide the commands you ran, the result, and all relevant logs. Similarly i am writing a cinder volume driver for my array and want to migrate volume from one volume type to another volume type for my array backends. so want to know how can i achieve this in cinder driver? There are several driver APIs that you can implement. First, you are most likely inheriting generic migration/retype from the base driver class. This works by creating a new volume, and moving data from the original to the new either using the hypervisor (for an attached volume) or by attaching both volumes to a server running cinder-volume and running dd. Your driver may be able to do more optimized migrations/retypes by implementing the respective APIs. The IBM storwize/svc driver implements both, as do several others - I suggest you look at them for examples. Thanks, Avishay -- *Avishay Traeger* *Storage RD* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web http://www.stratoscale.com/ | Blog http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/ | Twitter https://twitter.com/Stratoscale | Google+ https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts | Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] Changes to Cinder Core
+1 On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 7:16 PM, Mike Perez thin...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Mike Perez thin...@gmail.com wrote: It gives me great pleasure to nominate Ivan Kolodyazhny (e0ne) for Cinder core. Ivan's reviews have been valuable in decisions, and his contributions to Cinder core code have been greatly appreciated. Reviews: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/reviewer:%22Ivan+Kolodyazhny+%253Ce0ne%2540e0ne.info%253E%22,n,z Contributions: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/owner:%22Ivan+Kolodyazhny%22+project:+openstack/cinder,n,z 30/90 day review stats: http://stackalytics.com/report/contribution/cinder-group/30 http://stackalytics.com/report/contribution/cinder-group/90 As new contributors step up to help in the project, some move onto other things. I would like to recognize Josh Durgin for his early contributions to Nova volume, early involvement with Cinder, and now unfortunately departure from the Cinder core team. Cinder core, please reply with a +1 for approval. This will be left open until Jan 26th. Assuming there are no objections, this will go forward after voting is closed. And apologies for missing the [cinder] subject prefix. -- Mike Perez __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- *Avishay Traeger* *Storage RD* Mobile: +972 54 447 1475 E-mail: avis...@stratoscale.com Web http://www.stratoscale.com/ | Blog http://www.stratoscale.com/blog/ | Twitter https://twitter.com/Stratoscale | Google+ https://plus.google.com/u/1/b/108421603458396133912/108421603458396133912/posts | Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/company/stratoscale __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova] Are disk-intensive operations managed ... or not?
I would say that wipe-on-delete is not necessary in most deployments. Most storage backends exhibit the following behavior: 1. Delete volume A that has data on physical sectors 1-10 2. Create new volume B 3. Read from volume B before writing, which happens to map to physical sector 5 - backend should return zeroes here, and not data from volume A In case the backend doesn't provide this rather standard behavior, data must be wiped immediately. Otherwise, the only risk is physical security, and if that's not adequate, customers shouldn't be storing all their data there regardless. You could also run a periodic job to wipe deleted volumes to reduce the window of vulnerability, without making delete_volume take a ridiculously long time. Encryption is a good option as well, and of course it protects the data before deletion as well (as long as your keys are protected...) Bottom line - I too think the default in devstack should be to disable this option, and think we should consider making the default False in Cinder itself. This isn't the first time someone has asked why volume deletion takes 20 minutes... As for queuing backup operations and managing bandwidth for various operations, ideally this would be done with a holistic view, so that for example Cinder operations won't interfere with Nova, or different Nova operations won't interfere with each other, but that is probably far down the road. Thanks, Avishay On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Chris Friesen chris.frie...@windriver.com wrote: On 10/19/2014 09:33 AM, Avishay Traeger wrote: Hi Preston, Replies to some of your cinder-related questions: 1. Creating a snapshot isn't usually an I/O intensive operation. Are you seeing I/O spike or CPU? If you're seeing CPU load, I've seen the CPU usage of cinder-api spike sometimes - not sure why. 2. The 'dd' processes that you see are Cinder wiping the volumes during deletion. You can either disable this in cinder.conf, or you can use a relatively new option to manage the bandwidth used for this. IMHO, deployments should be optimized to not do very long/intensive management operations - for example, use backends with efficient snapshots, use CoW operations wherever possible rather than copying full volumes/images, disabling wipe on delete, etc. In a public-cloud environment I don't think it's reasonable to disable wipe-on-delete. Arguably it would be better to use encryption instead of wipe-on-delete. When done with the backing store, just throw away the key and it'll be secure enough for most purposes. Chris ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder][nova] Are disk-intensive operations managed ... or not?
Hi Preston, Replies to some of your cinder-related questions: 1. Creating a snapshot isn't usually an I/O intensive operation. Are you seeing I/O spike or CPU? If you're seeing CPU load, I've seen the CPU usage of cinder-api spike sometimes - not sure why. 2. The 'dd' processes that you see are Cinder wiping the volumes during deletion. You can either disable this in cinder.conf, or you can use a relatively new option to manage the bandwidth used for this. IMHO, deployments should be optimized to not do very long/intensive management operations - for example, use backends with efficient snapshots, use CoW operations wherever possible rather than copying full volumes/images, disabling wipe on delete, etc. Thanks, Avishay On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Preston L. Bannister pres...@bannister.us wrote: OK, I am fairly new here (to OpenStack). Maybe I am missing something. Or not. Have a DevStack, running in a VM (VirtualBox), backed by a single flash drive (on my current generation MacBook). Could be I have something off in my setup. Testing nova backup - first the existing implementation, then my (much changed) replacement. Simple scripts for testing. Create images. Create instances (five). Run backup on all instances. Currently found in: https://github.com/dreadedhill-work/stack-backup/tree/master/backup-scripts First time I started backups of all (five) instances, load on the Devstack VM went insane, and all but one backup failed. Seems that all of the backups were performed immediately (or attempted), without any sort of queuing or load management. Huh. Well, maybe just the backup implementation is naive... I will write on this at greater length, but backup should interfere as little as possible with foreground processing. Overloading a host is entirely unacceptable. Replaced the backup implementation so it does proper queuing (among other things). Iterating forward - implementing and testing. Fired off snapshots on five Cinder volumes (attached to five instances). Again the load shot very high. Huh. Well, in a full-scale OpenStack setup, maybe storage can handle that much I/O more gracefully ... or not. Again, should taking snapshots interfere with foreground activity? I would say, most often not. Queuing and serializing snapshots would strictly limit the interference with foreground. Also, very high end storage can perform snapshots *very* quickly, so serialized snapshots will not be slow. My take is that the default behavior should be to queue and serialize all heavy I/O operations, with non-default allowances for limited concurrency. Cleaned up (which required reboot/unstack/stack and more). Tried again. Ran two test backups (which in the current iteration create Cinder volume snapshots). Asked Cinder to delete the snapshots. Again, very high load factors, and in top I can see two long-running dd processes. (Given I have a single disk, more than one dd is not good.) Running too many heavyweight operations against storage can lead to thrashing. Queuing can strictly limit that load, and insure better and reliable performance. I am not seeing evidence of this thought in my OpenStack testing. So far it looks like there is no thought to managing the impact of disk intensive management operations. Am I missing something? ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] Get server side exception
Hi Eduard, According to the error you had, I assume your volume format is sparse (probably qcow2). When you create a volume out of it, Cinder will convert the format to 'raw', which increases its size. I believe the 'size' parameter is now optional if you create a volume from a source (such as image, snapshot, or other volume). With regard to your question on how to view this on the client side, if the volume goes to 'error' state, there is no way to know why right now without checking logs. Yes, this is bad. Thanks, Avishay On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Eduard Matei eduard.ma...@cloudfounders.com wrote: Hi, I'm creating a cinder volume from a glance image (Fedora). The image is 199 Mb and since it's for testing, i created a volume of size 1GB. This fails, and puts image in status Error. (without any more info) Digging through screens i found an exception ImageUnacceptable (size is 2 GB and doesn't fit ...). Is there a way to get this exception on the client side? e.g. cinder show VOLUMEID to contain the exception message Thanks, -- *Eduard Biceri Matei, Senior Software Developer* www.cloudfounders.com | eduard.ma...@cloudfounders.com *CloudFounders, The Private Cloud Software Company* Disclaimer: This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the named addressee or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the named addressee, you are hereby notified that you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this email in error we request you to notify us by reply e-mail and to delete all electronic files of the message. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the content of this message, and shall have no liability for any loss or damage suffered by the user, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-Dev][Cinder] Cinder Core nomination
+1 On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 9:55 AM, Boring, Walter walter.bor...@hp.com wrote: Hey guys, I wanted to pose a nomination for Cinder core. Xing Yang. She has been active in the cinder community for many releases and has worked on several drivers as well as other features for cinder itself. She has been doing an awesome job doing reviews and helping folks out in the #openstack-cinder irc channel for a long time. I think she would be a good addition to the core team. Walt ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][core] Expectations of core reviewers
I think to make the Summit sessions more effective: 1. The presenter to put in more effort beforehand - implement a rough POC, write up a detailed etherpad, etc. where everything is ready say 2-3 weeks before the Summit. Maybe even require a reviewed spec for sessions which introduce new features? 2. The active members of the project (core and otherwise) to put in more effort beforehand - review the POC and/or etherpad, digest the information, maybe even start a preliminary discussion on IRC to sharpen the proposal 3. Rather than the presenter giving a lecture and the project members trying to digest what is being said, with no time to think of implications, design options, etc., there should just be that debate to refine the idea (I think this is what usually happens at the mid-cycle meetup). 4. Community members who did not do their homework should be discouraged from actively participating in that session (i.e., asking basic questions or taking the discussion on tangents). Anyone who has questions or off-topic comments can take it up with the presenter or anyone else during the breaks. Of course this requires a lot discipline on everyone's part, but I think it would not only make the Summit sessions more valuable, but also help developers who present to get their code in quicker and thereby help the project to meet its objectives for that release. Thanks, Avishay On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 6:40 PM, John Griffith john.griff...@solidfire.com wrote: On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote: On 08/18/2014 06:18 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Doug Hellmann wrote: On Aug 13, 2014, at 4:42 PM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote: Let me try to say it another way. You seemed to say that it wasn't much to ask given the rate at which things happen in OpenStack. I would argue that given the rate, we should not try to ask more of individuals (like this proposal) and risk burnout. Instead, we should be doing our best to be more open an inclusive to give the project the best chance to grow, as that's the best way to get more done. I think an increased travel expectation is a raised bar that will hinder team growth, not help it. +1, well said. Sorry, I was away for a few days. This is a topic I have a few strong opinions on :) There is no denial that the meetup format is working well, comparatively better than the design summit format. There is also no denial that that requiring 4 travels per year for a core dev is unreasonable. Where is the limit ? Wouldn't we be more productive and aligned if we did one per month ? No, the question is how to reach a sufficient level of focus and alignment while keeping the number of mandatory travel at 2 per year. I don't think our issue comes from not having enough F2F time. Our issue is that the design summit no longer reaches its objectives of aligning key contributors on a common plan, and we need to fix it. We established the design summit as the once-per-cycle opportunity to have face-to-face time and get alignment across the main contributors to a project. That used to be completely sufficient, but now it doesn't work as well... which resulted in alignment and team discussions to be discussed at mid-cycle meetups instead. Why ? And what could we change to have those alignment discussions at the design summit again ? Why are design summits less productive that mid-cycle meetups those days ? Is it because there are too many non-contributors in the design summit rooms ? Is it the 40-min format ? Is it the distractions (having talks to give somewhere else, booths to attend, parties and dinners to be at) ? Is it that beginning of cycle is not the best moment ? Once we know WHY the design summit fails its main objective, maybe we can fix it. My gut feeling is that having a restricted audience and a smaller group lets people get to the bottom of an issue and reach consensus. And that you need at least half a day or a full day of open discussion to reach such alignment. And that it's not particularly great to get such alignment in the middle of the cycle, getting it at the start is still the right way to align with the release cycle. Nothing prevents us from changing part of the design summit format (even the Paris one!), and restrict attendance to some of the sessions. And if the main issue is the distraction from the conference colocation, we might have to discuss the future of co-location again. In that 2 events per year objective, we could make the conference the optional cycle thing, and a developer-oriented specific event the mandatory one. If we manage to have alignment at the design summit, then it doesn't spell the end of the mid-cycle things. But then, ideally the extra mid-cycle gatherings should be focused on getting specific stuff done, rather than general team alignment. Think workshop/hackathon
Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] About storing volume format info for filesystem-based drivers
One more reason why block storage management doesn't really work on file systems. I'm OK with storing the format, but that just means you fail migration/backup operations with different formats, right? On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Trump.Zhang zhangleiqi...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, all: Currently, there are several filesystem-based drivers in Cinder, such as nfs, glusterfs, etc. Multiple format of volume other than raw can be potentially supported in these drivers, such as qcow2, raw, sparse, etc. However, Cinder does not store the actual format of volume and suppose all volumes are raw format. It will has or already has several problems as follows: 1. For volume migration, the generic migration implementation in Cinder uses the dd command to copy src volume to dest volume. If the src volume is qcow2 format, instance will not get the right data from volume after the dest volume attached to instance, because the info returned from Cinder states that the volume's format is raw other than qcow2 2. For volume backup, the backup driver also supposes that src volumes are raw format, other format will not be supported Indeed, glusterfs driver has used qemu-img info command to judge the format of volume. However, as the comment from Duncan in [1] says, this auto detection method has many possible error / exploit vectors. Because if the beginning content of a raw volume happens to a qcow2 disk, auto detection method will judge this volume to be a qcow2 volume wrongly. I proposed that the format info should be added to admin_metadata of volumes, and enforce it on all operations, such as create, copy, migrate and retype. The format will be only set / updated for filesystem-based drivers, other drivers will not contains this metadata and have a default raw format. Any advice? [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/100529/ -- --- Best Regards Trump.Zhang ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder][Driver] Delete snapshot
This is what I thought of as well. In the rbd driver, if a request to delete a volume comes in, where the volume object on the backend has other objects that depend on it, it simply renames it: https://github.com/openstack/cinder/blob/master/cinder/volume/drivers/rbd.py#L657 There is also code to clean up those renamed objects. The point is, Cinder has an API which should be consistent no matter what storage is being used. The driver must do whatever necessary to implement the API rather than allowing quirks of the specific storage to show through to the user. Thanks, Avishay On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 8:13 PM, Duncan Thomas duncan.tho...@gmail.com wrote: So these are all features that various other backends manage to implement successfully. Your best point of reference might be the ceph code - I believe it deals with very similar issues in various ways. On 19 June 2014 18:01, Amit Das amit@cloudbyte.com wrote: Hi All, Thanks for clarifying the Cinder behavior w.r.t a snapshot its clones which seems to be independent/decoupled. The current volume its snapshot based validations in Cinder holds true for snapshot its clones w.r.t my storage requirements. Our storage is built on top of ZFS filesystem. The volume - snapshot - clone that I am referring to in turn points to a ZFS dataset - ZFS snapshot - ZFS clone. The best part of ZFS based snapshots clones are : these are almost instantaneous ( i.e. copy-on-write based copies) these will not consume any additional (initially) a clone initially shares all its disk space with the original snapshot, its used property is initially zero. As changes are made to the clone, it uses more space. The used property of the original snapshot does not consider the disk space consumed by the clone. Further optimizations i.e. cool feature: While creating VM clones, a hypervisor driver can delegate part of its cloning process to storage driver hence, the overall VM cloning will be very very fast. Regards, Amit CloudByte Inc. On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 9:16 PM, John Griffith john.griff...@solidfire.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Amit Das amit@cloudbyte.com wrote: Hi Stackers, I have been implementing a Cinder driver for our storage solution facing issues with below scenario. Scenario - When a user/admin tries to delete a snapshot that has associated clone(s), an error message/log should be shown to the user stating that 'There are clones associated to this snapshot. Hence, snapshot cannot be deleted'. What's the use model of clones associated with the snapshot? What are these clones from a Cinder perspective. Easy answer is: don't create them, but I realize you probably have a cool feature or optimization that you're trying to leverage here. Implementation issues - If Cinder driver throws an Exception the snapshot will have error_deleting status will not be usable. If Cinder driver logs the error silently then Openstack will probably mark the snapshot as deleted. So as others point out, from a Cinder perspective this is what I/we would expect. Scott made some really good points, but the point is we do not want to behave differently for every single driver. The agreed upon mission for Cinder is to actually provide a consistent API and set of behaviors to end users regardless of what backend device they're using (in other words that should remain pretty much invisible to the end-user). What do you use the Clones of the Snapshot for? Maybe we can come up with another approach that works and keeps consistency in the API. What is the appropriate procedure that needs to be followed for above usecase. Regards, Amit CloudByte Inc. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Duncan Thomas ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] Mid-cycle meetup for Cinder devs
I think you can create an easy survey with doodle.com. You can fill in the dates, and ask people to specify next to their names if their attendance will be physical or virtual. On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 12:16 AM, D'Angelo, Scott scott.dang...@hp.com wrote: During the June 11 #openstack-cinder meeting we discussed a mid-cycle meetup. The agenda is To be Determined. I have inquired and HP in Fort Collins, CO has room and network connectivity available. There were some dates that worked well for reserving a nice room: July 14,15,17,18, 21-25, 27-Aug 1 But a room could be found regardless. Virtual connectivity would also be available. Some of the open questions are: Are developers interested in a mid-cycle meetup? What dates are Not Good (Blackout dates)? What dates are Good? Whom might be able to be physically present in Ft Collins, CO? Are there alternative locations to be considered? Someone had mentioned a Google Survey. Would someone like to create that? Which questions should be asked? ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] Support LVM on a shared LU
Hello Mitsuhiro, I'm sorry, but I remain unconvinced. Is there a customer demand for this feature? If you'd like, feel free to add this topic to a Cinder weekly meeting agenda, and join the meeting so that we can have an interactive discussion. https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/CinderMeetings Thanks, Avishay On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 12:31 AM, Mitsuhiro Tanino mitsuhiro.tan...@hds.com wrote: Hi Avishay-san, Thank you for your review and comments for my proposal. I commented in-line. So the way I see it, the value here is a generic driver that can work with any storage. The downsides: A generic driver for any storage is an one of benefit. But main benefit of proposed driver is as follows. - Reduce hardware based storage workload by offloading the workload to software based volume operation. Conventionally, operations to an enterprise storage such as volume creation, deletion, snapshot, etc are only permitted system administrator and they handle these operations after carefully examining. In OpenStack cloud environment, every user have a permission to execute these storage operations via cinder. As a result, workloads of storages have been increasing and it is difficult to manage the workloads. If we have two drivers in regards to a storage, we can use both way as the situation demands. Ex. As for Standard type storage, use proposed software based LVM cinder driver. As for High performance type storage, use hardware based cinder driver. As a result, we can offload the workload of standard type storage from physical storage to cinder host. 1. The admin has to manually provision a very big volume and attach it to the Nova and Cinder hosts. Every time a host is rebooted, I thinks current FC-based cinder drivers using scsi scan to find created LU. # echo - - - /sys/class/scsi_host/host#/scan The admin can find additional LU using this, so host reboot are not required. or introduced, the admin must do manual work. This is one of the things OpenStack should be trying to avoid. This can't be automated without a driver, which is what you're trying to avoid. Yes. Some admin manual work is required and can’t be automated. I would like to know whether these operations are acceptable range to enjoy benefits from my proposed driver. 2. You lose on performance to volumes by adding another layer in the stack. I think this is case by case. When user use a cinder volume for DATA BASE, they prefer raw volume and proposed driver can’t provide raw cinder volume. In this case, I recommend High performance type storage. LVM is a default feature in many Linux distribution. Also LVM is used many enterprise systems and I think there is not critical performance loss. 3. You lose performance with snapshots - appliances will almost certainly have more efficient snapshots than LVM over network (consider that for every COW operation, you are reading synchronously over the network). (Basically, you turned your fully-capable storage appliance into a dumb JBOD) I agree that storage has efficient COW snapshot feature, so we can create new Boot Volume from glance quickly. In this case, I recommend High performance type storage. LVM can’t create nested snapshot with shared LVM now. Therefore, we can’t assign writable LVM snapshot to instances. Is this answer for your comment? In short, I think the cons outweigh the pros. Are there people deploying OpenStack who would deploy their storage like this? Please consider above main benefit. Regards, Mitsuhiro Tanino mitsuhiro.tan...@hds.com *HITACHI DATA SYSTEMS* c/o Red Hat, 314 Littleton Road, Westford, MA 01886 *From:* Avishay Traeger [mailto:avis...@stratoscale.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, May 21, 2014 4:36 AM *To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) *Cc:* Tomoki Sekiyama *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] Support LVM on a shared LU So the way I see it, the value here is a generic driver that can work with any storage. The downsides: 1. The admin has to manually provision a very big volume and attach it to the Nova and Cinder hosts. Every time a host is rebooted, or introduced, the admin must do manual work. This is one of the things OpenStack should be trying to avoid. This can't be automated without a driver, which is what you're trying to avoid. 2. You lose on performance to volumes by adding another layer in the stack. 3. You lose performance with snapshots - appliances will almost certainly have more efficient snapshots than LVM over network (consider that for every COW operation, you are reading synchronously over the network). (Basically, you turned your fully-capable storage appliance into a dumb JBOD) In short, I think the cons outweigh the pros. Are there people deploying OpenStack who would deploy their storage like this? Thanks
Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] Support LVM on a shared LU
So the way I see it, the value here is a generic driver that can work with any storage. The downsides: 1. The admin has to manually provision a very big volume and attach it to the Nova and Cinder hosts. Every time a host is rebooted, or introduced, the admin must do manual work. This is one of the things OpenStack should be trying to avoid. This can't be automated without a driver, which is what you're trying to avoid. 2. You lose on performance to volumes by adding another layer in the stack. 3. You lose performance with snapshots - appliances will almost certainly have more efficient snapshots than LVM over network (consider that for every COW operation, you are reading synchronously over the network). (Basically, you turned your fully-capable storage appliance into a dumb JBOD) In short, I think the cons outweigh the pros. Are there people deploying OpenStack who would deploy their storage like this? Thanks, Avishay On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 6:31 PM, Mitsuhiro Tanino mitsuhiro.tan...@hds.comwrote: Hello All, I’m proposing a feature of LVM driver to support LVM on a shared LU. The proposed LVM volume driver provides these benefits. - Reduce hardware based storage workload by offloading the workload to software based volume operation. - Provide quicker volume creation and snapshot creation without storage workloads. - Enable cinder to any kinds of shared storage volumes without specific cinder storage driver. - Better I/O performance using direct volume access via Fibre channel. In the attachment pdf, following contents are explained. 1. Detail of Proposed LVM volume driver 1-1. Big Picture 1-2. Administrator preparation 1-3. Work flow of volume creation and attachment 2. Target of Proposed LVM volume driver 3. Comparison of Proposed LVM volume driver Could you review the attachment? Any comments, questions, additional ideas would be appreciated. Also there are blueprints, wiki and patches related to the slide. https://blueprints.launchpad.net/cinder/+spec/lvm-driver-for-shared-storage https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/lvm-driver-for-shared-storage https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Cinder/NewLVMbasedDriverForSharedStorageInCinder https://review.openstack.org/#/c/92479/ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/92443/ Regards, Mitsuhiro Tanino mitsuhiro.tan...@hds.com *HITACHI DATA SYSTEMS* c/o Red Hat, 314 Littleton Road, Westford, MA 01886 ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] pep8 issues and how to pep8 locally ?
Deepak, Sean meant that 'tox -epep8' is the command that runs the pep8 checks. You can install tox with 'pip install tox' and pep8 with 'pip install pep8'. Once you have those, run 'tox -epep8' Thanks, Avishay On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 1:15 PM, Deepak Shetty dpkshe...@gmail.com wrote: [stack@devstack-vm cinder]$ sudo pip install tox-epep8 Downloading/unpacking tox-epep8 Could not find any downloads that satisfy the requirement tox-epep8 Cleaning up... No distributions at all found for tox-epep8 Storing complete log in /root/.pip/pip.log [stack@devstack-vm cinder]$ sudo yum search tox-epep8 Warning: No matches found for: tox-epep8 No matches found [stack@devstack-vm cinder]$ On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote: On 04/28/2014 06:08 AM, Deepak Shetty wrote: Hi, H703 Multiple positional placeholders I got this for one of my patch and googling i could find that the fix is to use dict instead of direct substitues.. which i did.. but it still gives me the error :( Also just running pep8 locally on my glsuterfs.py file doesn't show any issue but gerrit does. So how do i run the same pep8 that gerrit does locally on my box, so that I don't end up resending new patches due to failed gerrit build checks ? tox -epep8 -Sean -- Sean Dague http://dague.net ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] Regarding manage_existing and unmanage
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Deepak Shetty dpkshe...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Avishay Traeger avis...@stratoscale.comwrote: On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 9:17 AM, Deepak Shetty dpkshe...@gmail.comwrote: Hi List, I had few Qs on the implementation of manage_existing and unmanage API extns 1) For LVM case, it renames the lv.. isn't it better to use name_id (one used during cinder migrate to keep id same for a diff backend name/id) to map cinder name/id to backend name/id and thus avoid renaming the backend storage. Renaming isn't good since it changes the original name of the storage object and hence storage admin may lose track? The Storwize uses UID and changes vdisk_name on the backend array which isn't good either. Is renaming a must, if yes why ? 'name_id' is an ID, like c8b3d8e2-2410-4362-b24b-548a13fa850b. In migration, both the original and new volumes use the same template for volume names, just with a different ID, so name_id works well for that. When importing a volume that wasn't created by Cinder, chances are it won't conform to this template, and so name_id won't work (i.e., I can call the volume 'my_very_important_db_volume', and name_id can't help with that). When importing, the admin should give the volume a proper name and description, and won't lose track of it - it is now being managed by Cinder. Avishay, thanks for ur reply.. it did help. Just one more Q tho... (i.e., I can call the volume 'my_very_important_db_volume', and name_id can't help with that). This is the name of the volume. but isn't it common for most arrays to provide name and ID (which is again UUID) for a volume on the backend.. so name_id can still point to the UID which has the name 'my_very_important_db_volume' In fact in storwize, you are using vdisk_id itself and changing the vdisk_name to match what the user gave.. and vdisk_id is a UUID and matches w/ name_id format Not exactly, it's a number (like '5'), not a UUID like c8b3d8e2-2410-4362-b24b-548a13fa850b Alternatively, does this mean we need to make name_id a generic field (not a ID) and then use somethign like uuidutils.is_uuid_like() to determine if its UUID or non-UUID and then backend will accordinly map it ? Lastly, I said storage admin will lose track of it bcos he would have named is my_vol and when he asks cidner to manage it using my_cinder_vol its not expected that u wud rename the volume's name on the backend :) I mean its good if we could implement manage_existing w/o renaming as then it would seem like less disruptive :) I think there are a few trade-offs here - making it less disruptive in this sense makes it more disruptive to: 1. Managing the storage over its lifetime. If we assume that the admin will stick with Cinder for managing their volumes, and if they need to find the volume on the storage, it should be done uniformly (i.e., go to the backend and find the volume named 'volume-%s' % name_id). 2. The code, where a change of this kind could make things messy. Basically the rename approach has a little bit of complexity overhead when you do manage_existing, but from then on it's just like any other volume. Otherwise, it's always a special case in different code paths, which could be tricky. If you still feel that rename is wrong and that there is a better approach, I encourage you to try, and post code if it works. I don't mind being proved wrong. :) Thanks, Avishay ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] Regarding manage_existing and unmanage
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 9:17 AM, Deepak Shetty dpkshe...@gmail.com wrote: Hi List, I had few Qs on the implementation of manage_existing and unmanage API extns 1) For LVM case, it renames the lv.. isn't it better to use name_id (one used during cinder migrate to keep id same for a diff backend name/id) to map cinder name/id to backend name/id and thus avoid renaming the backend storage. Renaming isn't good since it changes the original name of the storage object and hence storage admin may lose track? The Storwize uses UID and changes vdisk_name on the backend array which isn't good either. Is renaming a must, if yes why ? 'name_id' is an ID, like c8b3d8e2-2410-4362-b24b-548a13fa850b. In migration, both the original and new volumes use the same template for volume names, just with a different ID, so name_id works well for that. When importing a volume that wasn't created by Cinder, chances are it won't conform to this template, and so name_id won't work (i.e., I can call the volume 'my_very_important_db_volume', and name_id can't help with that). When importing, the admin should give the volume a proper name and description, and won't lose track of it - it is now being managed by Cinder. 2) How about a force rename option can be provided ? if force = yes, use rename otherwise name_id ? As I mentioned, name_id won't work. You would need some DB changes to accept ANY volume name, and it can get messy. 3) Durign unmanage its good if we can revert the name back (in case it was renamed as part of manage), so that we leave the storage object as it was before it was managed by cinder ? I don't see any compelling reason to do this. Thanks, Avishay ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] AUTO: Avishay Traeger is prepared for DELETION (FREEZE) (returning 05/12/2013)
I am out of the office until 05/12/2013. Avishay Traeger is prepared for DELETION (FREEZE) Note: This is an automated response to your message Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder][FFE] Cinder switch-over to oslo.messaging sent on 06/03/2014 12:50:51. This is the only notification you will receive while this person is away. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] Questions about proposed volume replication patch
Hi Bruce, Bruce Montague bruce_monta...@symantec.com wrote on 02/23/2014 03:35:10 AM: Hi, regarding the proposed Cinder volume replication patch, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/64026 : The replication driver methods are create_replica(), swap_replica(), delete_replica(), replication_status_check(), enable_replica(), and disable_replica(). What are the expected semantics of the enable and disable methods? In enable_vol_replication() it looks like the intent is that replicas are created by create, than started by enable (and vice versa for disable/delete). One of the challenges in the replication design was creating a driver API that would work for all backends. One way of doing so was to allow the driver to execute on both sides of the replication. So when creating a replicated volume we have: 1. primary backend: create_volume 2. secondary backend: create_replica 3. primary backend: enable_replica When deleting a replicated volume we have the opposite: 1. primary backend: disable_replica 2. secondary backend: delete_replica 3. primary backend: delete_volume The goal here is to be flexible and allow all drivers to implement replication. If you look at the patch for IBM Storwize/SVC replication ( https://review.openstack.org/#/c/70792/) you'll see two main replication modes supported in replication.py. The first (starting on line 58) simply requires making a copy of the volume in the proper pool, and so only create_replica and delete_replica are implemented there. The second method (starting on line 118) implements all of the functions: create_replica creates a second volume, and enable_replica creates a replication relationship between the two volumes. Are the plugin's enable/disable method intended for just a one-time start and stop of the replication or are they expected to be able to cleanly pause and resume the replication process? Is disable expected to flush volume contents all the way through to the replica? As of now you can assume that create_replica and enable_replica are called together, and disable_replica and delete_replica are also called together, in those orders. So if we call disable_replica you can assume we are getting rid of the replica. Another question is what is the expected usage of primary_replication_unit_id and secondary_replication_unit_id in the replication_relationships table. Are these optional? Are they the type of fields that could go in the driver_data field for the relationship? Those two fields are filled in automatically - see replication_update_db() in scheduler/driver.py They simply hold whatever the driver returns in 'replication_unit_id', which will likely be needed by drivers to know who the other side is. In addition, you can put whatever you like driver_data to implement replication for you backend. Thanks, Avishay ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-Dev] [Cinder] Cinder driver verification
Walter A. Boring IV walter.bor...@hp.com wrote on 02/13/2014 06:59:38 PM: What I would do different for the Icehouse release is this: If a driver doesn't pass the certification test by IceHouse RC1, then we have a bug filed against the driver. I would also put a warning message in the log for that driver that it doesn't pass the certification test. I would not remove it from the codebase. Also: if a driver hasn't even run the certification test by RC1, then we mark the driver as uncertified and deprecated in the code and throw an error at driver init time. We can have a option in cinder.conf that says ignore_uncertified_drivers=False. If an admin wants to ignore the error, they set the flag to True, and we let the driver init at next startup. The admin then takes full responsibility for running uncertified code. I think removing the drivers outright is premature for Icehouse, since the certification process is a new thing. For Juno, we remove any drivers that are still marked as uncertified and haven't run the tests. I think the purpose of the tests is to get vendors to actually run their code through tempest and prove to the community that they are willing to show that they are fixing their code. At the end of the day, it better serves the community and Cinder if we have many working drivers. My $0.02, Walt I like this. Make that $0.04 now :) Avishay ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] Cinder Stability Hack-a-thon
Will join remotely for a few hours each day (time zones and all). Nice effort! Thanks, Avishay From: Mike Perez thin...@gmail.com To: OpenStack Development Mailing List openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org, Date: 02/01/2014 10:09 AM Subject:[openstack-dev] Cinder Stability Hack-a-thon Folks, I would love to get people together who are interested in Cinder stability to really dedicate a few days. This is not for additional features, but rather finishing what we already have and really getting those in a good shape before the end of the release. When: Feb 24-26 Where: San Francisco (DreamHost Office can host), Colorado, remote? Some ideas that come to mind: - Cleanup/complete volume retype - Cleanup/complete volume migration [1][2] - Other ideas that come from this thread. I can't stress the dedicated part enough. I think if we have some folks from core and anyone interested in contributing and staying focus, we can really get a lot done in a few days with small set of doable stability goals to stay focused on. If there is enough interest, being together in the mentioned locations would be great, otherwise remote would be fine as long as people can stay focused and communicate through suggested ideas like team speak or google hangout. What do you guys think? Location? Other stability concerns to add to the list? [1] - https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/1255622 [2] - https://bugs.launchpad.net/cinder/+bug/1246200 -Mike Perez___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] weekly meeting
For me, 4/5 is currently 6/7AM. An hour later when daylight savings messes things up. Exactly wake up/get ready/kid to school/me to work time. I'd rather leave it as is (6/7PM depending on daylight savings). If you alternate, I may have to miss some. Thanks, Avishay From: John Griffith john.griff...@solidfire.com To: OpenStack Development Mailing List openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org, Date: 12/17/2013 05:08 AM Subject:[openstack-dev] [cinder] weekly meeting Hi All, Prompted by a recent suggestion from Tom Fifield, I thought I'd gauge some interest in either changing the weekly Cinder meeting time, or proposing a second meeting to accomodate folks in other time-zones. A large number of folks are already in time-zones that are not friendly to our current meeting time. I'm wondering if there is enough of an interest to move the meeting time from 16:00 UTC on Wednesdays, to 04:00 or 05:00 UTC? Depending on the interest I'd be willing to look at either moving the meeting for a trial period or holding a second meeting to make sure folks in other TZ's had a chance to be heard. Let me know your thoughts, if there are folks out there that feel unable to attend due to TZ conflicts and we can see what we might be able to do. Thanks, John ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-dev][cinder][glance] Should glance be installed on cinder only nodes?
Gans, No, you don't need to install Glance on Cinder nodes. Cinder will use the Glance client, which must be installed on the Cinder node (see python-glanceclient the requirements.txt file in Cinder's tree). Thanks, Avishay From: gans developer gans.develo...@gmail.com To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org, Date: 12/03/2013 10:58 AM Subject:[openstack-dev] [OpenStack-dev][cinder][glance] Should glance be installed on cinder only nodes? Hi All, I was performing Copy Image to Volume operation on my controller node which has glance and cinder installed. If i wish to create a cinder only node for cinder-volume operations , would i need to install glance also on this node for performing Copy Image to Volume operation ? Thanks, Gans.___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] Cloning vs copying images
Dmitry, You are correct. I made the same comment on the review before seeing this thread. Let's see how both patches turn out and we'll choose one. :) Thanks, Avishay From: Dmitry Borodaenko dborodae...@mirantis.com To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org, Date: 12/02/2013 09:32 PM Subject:[openstack-dev] [Cinder] Cloning vs copying images Hi OpenStack, particularly Cinder backend developers, Please consider the following two competing fixes for the same problem: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/58870/ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/58893/ The problem being fixed is that some backends, specifically Ceph RBD, can only boot from volumes created from images in a certain format, in RBD's case, RAW. When an image in a different format gets cloned into a volume, it cannot be booted from. Obvious solution is to refuse clone operation and copy/convert the image instead. And now the principal question: is it safe to assume that this restriction applies to all backends? Should the fix enforce copy of non-RAW images for all backends? Or should the decision whether to clone or copy the image be made in each backend? The first fix puts this logic into the RBD backend, and makes changes necessary for all other backends to have enough information to make a similar decision if necessary. The problem with this approach is that it's relatively intrusive, because driver clone_image() method signature has to be changed. The second fix has significantly less code changes, but it does prevent cloning non-RAW images for all backends. I am not sure if this is a real problem or not. Can anyone point at a backend that can boot from a volume cloned from a non-RAW image? I can think of one candidate: GPFS is a file-based backend, while GPFS has a file clone operation. Is GPFS backend able to boot from, say, a QCOW2 volume? Thanks, -- Dmitry Borodaenko ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] ERROR : Unable to locate Volume Group stack-volumes
Hello Xin, This error indicates that there is no volume group named stack-volumes. Can you verify if it exists with the command sudo vgs? If does not exist, perhaps something is in the devstack logs about why it failed to create it? Thanks, Avishay From: openstack learner openstacklea...@gmail.com To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org, openst...@lists.openstack.org, Date: 11/08/2013 08:11 PM Subject:[openstack-dev] ERROR : Unable to locate Volume Group stack-volumes Hi all, I am using devstack and sometimes when i do a ./unstack.sh and then ./stack.sh, there is a Unable to locate Volume Group stack-volumes ERROR as followed. Does anyone know what causes the error and how to solve the issue? Before i do the ./unstack.sh and redo ./stack.sh. Everything looks good. thanks xin 2013-11-08 09:57:54.869 ERROR cinder.brick.local_dev.lvm [req-3ccb7cde-b7bf-472a-afb6-c1e15b1cf589 None None] Unable to locate Volume Group stack-volumes 2013-11-08 09:57:54.869 ERROR cinder.volume.manager [req-3ccb7cde-b7bf-472a-afb6-c1e15b1cf589 None None] Error encountered during initialization of driver: LVMISCSIDriver 2013-11-08 09:57:54.870 ERROR cinder.volume.manager [req-3ccb7cde-b7bf-472a-afb6-c1e15b1cf589 None None] Bad or unexpected response from the storage volume backend API: Volume Group stack-volumes does not exist 2013-11-08 09:57:54.870 TRACE cinder.volume.manager Traceback (most recent call last): 2013-11-08 09:57:54.870 TRACE cinder.volume.manager File /opt/stack/cinder/cinder/volume/manager.py, line 191, in init_host 2013-11-08 09:57:54.870 TRACE cinder.volume.manager self.driver.check_for_setup_error() 2013-11-08 09:57:54.870 TRACE cinder.volume.manager File /opt/stack/cinder/cinder/volume/drivers/lvm.py, line 89, in check_for_setup_error 2013-11-08 09:57:54.870 TRACE cinder.volume.manager raise exception.VolumeBackendAPIException(data=message) 2013-11-08 09:57:54.870 TRACE cinder.volume.manager VolumeBackendAPIException: Bad or unexpected response from the storage volume backend API: Volume Group stack-volumes does not exist 2013-11-08 09:57:54.870 TRACE cinder.volume.manager ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] Improvement of Cinder API wrt https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1213953
Chris Friesen chris.frie...@windriver.com wrote on 11/05/2013 10:21:07 PM: I think the proper fix is to make sure that Cinder is moving the volume into 'error' state in all cases where there is an error. Nova can then poll as long as its in the 'downloading' state, until it's 'available' or 'error'. Is there a reason why Cinder would legitimately get stuck in 'downloading'? There's always the cinder service crashed and couldn't restart case. :) Well we should fix that too :) Your Cinder processes should be properly HA'ed, and yes, Cinder needs to be robust enough to resume operations. I don't see how adding a callback would help - wouldn't you still need to timeout if you don't get a callback? Thanks, Avishay ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] Improvement of Cinder API wrt https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1213953
So while doubling the timeout will fix some cases, there will be cases with larger volumes and/or slower systems where the bug will still hit. Even timing out on the download progress can lead to unnecessary timeouts (if it's really slow, or volume is really big, it can stay at 5% for some time). I think the proper fix is to make sure that Cinder is moving the volume into 'error' state in all cases where there is an error. Nova can then poll as long as its in the 'downloading' state, until it's 'available' or 'error'. Is there a reason why Cinder would legitimately get stuck in 'downloading'? Thanks, Avishay From: John Griffith john.griff...@solidfire.com To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org, Date: 11/05/2013 07:41 AM Subject:Re: [openstack-dev] Improvement of Cinder API wrt https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1213953 On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 7:27 AM, John Griffith john.griff...@solidfire.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 6:29 AM, Chris Friesen chris.frie...@windriver.com wrote: On 11/04/2013 03:49 PM, Solly Ross wrote: So, There's currently an outstanding issue with regards to a Nova shortcut command that creates a volume from an image and then boots from it in one fell swoop. The gist of the issue is that there is currently a set timeout which can time out before the volume creation has finished (it's designed to time out in case there is an error), in cases where the image download or volume creation takes an extended period of time (e.g. under a Gluster backend for Cinder with certain network conditions). The proposed solution is a modification to the Cinder API to provide more detail on what exactly is going on, so that we could programmatically tune the timeout. My initial thought is to create a new column in the Volume table called 'status_detail' to provide more detailed information about the current status. For instance, for the 'downloading' status, we could have 'status_detail' be the completion percentage or JSON containing the total size and the current amount copied. This way, at each interval we could check to see if the amount copied had changed, and trigger the timeout if it had not, instead of blindly assuming that the operation will complete within a given amount of time. What do people think? Would there be a better way to do this? The only other option I can think of would be some kind of callback that cinder could explicitly call to drive updates and/or notifications of faults rather than needing to wait for a timeout. Possibly a combination of both would be best, that way you could add a --poll option to the create volume and boot CLI command. I come from the kernel-hacking world and most things there involve event-driven callbacks. Looking at the openstack code I was kind of surprised to see hardcoded timeouts and RPC casts with no callbacks to indicate completion. Chris ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev I believe you're referring to [1], which was closed after a patch was added to nova to double the timeout length. Based on comments sounds like your still seeing issues on some Gluster (maybe other) setups? Rather than mess with the API in order to do debug, why don't you use the info in the cinder-logs? [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1213953 ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] Propose Jay Bryant for core
+1 From: John Griffith john.griff...@solidfire.com To: OpenStack Development Mailing List openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org, Date: 10/29/2013 11:05 PM Subject:[openstack-dev] [Cinder] Propose Jay Bryant for core Hey, I wanted to propose Jay Bryant (AKA jsbryant, AKA jungleboy, AKA :) ) for core membership on the Cinder team. Jay has been working on Cinder for a while now and has really shown some dedication and provided much needed help with quality reviews. In addition to his review activity he's also been very active in IRC and in Cinder development as well. I think he'd be a good add to the core team. Thanks, John ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] Towards OpenStack Disaster Recovery
Hi all, We (IBM and Red Hat) have begun discussions on enabling Disaster Recovery (DR) in OpenStack. We have created a wiki page with our initial thoughts: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/DisasterRecovery We encourage others to contribute to this wiki. In addition, we are planning the following activities at the Icehouse Summit in Hong Kong: 1. A presentation on the OpenStack DR vision: http://openstacksummitnovember2013.sched.org/event/36ef8daa098c248d7fbb4ac7409f802a#%20 2. A Cinder design summit session on storage replication: http://summit.openstack.org/cfp/details/69 3. An unconference session discussing the next steps for the design of OpenStack DR Note that we are not proposing a new OpenStack project, but are rather focused on enabling DR in existing projects. We hope that more people will join this effort; the above Summit activities can serve as a good starting point for that, as well as this mailing list, of course. Thank you, Avishay Traeger ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] how can i get volume name in create snapshot call
Dinakar, The driver's create_snapshot function gets a dictionary that describes the snapshot. In that dictionary, you have the volume_name field that has the source volume's name: snapshot['volume_name']. You can get other details via snapshot['volume'], which is a dictionary containing the volume's metadata. Hope that helps. Thanks, Avishay From: Dinakar Gorti Maruti dinakar...@cloudbyte.co To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org, Date: 10/15/2013 08:44 AM Subject:[openstack-dev] how can i get volume name in create snapshot call Dear all, we are in progress of implementing a new driver for cinder services , we have a scenario where we need volume name for creation of snapshot. In detail , we designed the driver in such a way that it communicates with our server through http calls , and now we need the volume name and other details in create snapshot function , how can we get those details Thanks Dinakar ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] Additions to Hypervisor Support Matrix
Hi all, I have added a few features to the hypervisor support matrix that are related to volume functions. https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/HypervisorSupportMatrix#Hypervisor_feature_support_matrix 1. iSCSI CHAP: Sets CHAP password on iSCSI connections 2. Fibre Channel: Use the FC protocol to attach volumes 3. Volume swap: Swap an attached volume with a different (unattached) volume - data is copied over 4. Volume rate limiting: Rate limit the I/Os to a given volume 1+2 are not new (Grizzly or before), while 3+4 are new in Havana (Cinder uses the former for live volume migration, and the latter for QoS/rate limiting). The purpose of this email is to notify hypervisor driver maintainers: 1. To update their entries 2. That these features exist and it would be great to have wide support I know the libvirt driver supports them all, but maybe the maintainers would like to update it themselves. Thanks! Avishay ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack][Cinder] Driver qualification
John Griffith john.griff...@solidfire.com wrote on 07/26/2013 03:44:12 AM: snip I think it would be a very useful tool for initial introduction of a new driver and even perhaps some sort of check that's run and submitted again prior to milestone releases. snip +1. Do you see this happening for Havana? Or should this be a summit topic? Thanks, Avishay ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Proposal for Ollie Leahy to join cinder-core
-1 I'm sorry to do that, and it really has nothing to do with Ollie or his work (which I appreciate very much). The main reason is that right now Cinder core has 8 members: 1. Avishay Traeger (IBM) 2. Duncan Thomas (HP) 3. Eric Harney (RedHat) 4. Huang Zhiteng (Intel) 5. John Griffith (SolidFire) 6. Josh Durgin (Inktank) 7. Mike Perez (DreamHost) 8. Walt Boring (HP) Adding another core team member from HP means that 1/3 of the core team is from HP. I believe that we should strive to have the core team be as diverse as possible, with as many companies as possible represented (big and small alike). I think that's one of the keys to keeping a project healthy and on the right track (nothing against HP - I would say the same for IBM or any other company). Further, we appointed two core members fairly recently (Walt and Eric), and I don't feel that we have a shortage at this time. Again, nothing personal against Ollie, Duncan, HP, or anyone else. Thanks, Avishay From: Duncan Thomas duncan.tho...@gmail.com To: Openstack (openst...@lists.launchpad.net) (openst...@lists.launchpad.net) openst...@lists.launchpad.net, OpenStack Development Mailing List openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org, Date: 07/17/2013 06:18 PM Subject:[openstack-dev] [cinder] Proposal for Ollie Leahy to join cinder-core Hi Everybody I'd like to propose Ollie Leahy for cinder core. He has been doing plenty of reviews and bug fixes, provided useful and tasteful negative reviews (something often of far higher value than a +1) and has joined in various design discussions. Thanks -- Duncan Thomas Cinder Core, HP Cloud Services ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] Proposal for Ollie Leahy to join cinder-core
Dan Smith d...@danplanet.com wrote on 07/17/2013 09:40:02 PM: The affiliation of core team members should not come into a decision like this. It is assumed that all core team members are wearing their upstream hat and aren't there merely to represent their employers interests. Mark beat me to it, but.. Yeah, what he said. Core members aren't investments the likes of which get you voting shares and they shouldn't enforced as such, IMHO. I agree, and didn't mean to imply that there would be a conscientious effort to move the project in a certain way, or that people would be purposefully voting for the good of their employers. Of course, voting should be based on what the individual believes would be best for the project as a whole, for all its users. However, a person's view of the project's direction is certainly influenced by the customers they meet, the use cases they encounter, and so on. Those employed by the same company generally will have similar views. It's not because of voting shares, or because of people representing their employers' interests rather than the project's. It's because those who come from similar backgrounds will tend to have similar views of what is good for the project, and a diverse population will tend to have a broader picture of the users' needs. I think the current Cinder core members provide a nice balance of views and backgrounds - people who understand the needs of public clouds as well as private clouds, those who interact with customers who are coming from certain deployment models such as Fibre Channel, those who deal with customers that are iSCSI-only operations, those that want NAS appliances, and those who want to go with server-based storage. I believe that diversity of ideas and backgrounds yields the best results, and that's why I voted with -1. If I were representing my employer's interests, I would go with +1, because HP has been pushing for more FC support, which is good for IBM. But I personally have invested many many hours in Cinder, and I want it to succeed everywhere. That's why I review 5,000 LOC patches from IBM's competitors with as much care as I do when reviewing my own code, and even fix bugs in their drivers. That's why I listen to every feature request and vote as objectively as I can, even if I've never encountered the use case for it myself. I want Cinder to succeed for every user and for every vendor, and I think that leadership with as wide a view as possible is important to that success. Thanks, Avishay ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack] [cinder] Proposal for Ollie Leahy to join cinder-core
Monty Taylor mord...@inaugust.com wrote on 07/17/2013 09:52:47 PM: On 07/17/2013 02:35 PM, John Griffith wrote: snip Just to point out a few things here, first off there is no guideline that states a company affiliation should have anything to do with the decision on voting somebody as core. I have ABSOLUTELY NO concern about representation of company affiliation what so ever. Quite frankly I wouldn't mind if there were 20 core members from HP, if they're all actively engaged and participating then that's great. I don't think there has been ANY incidence of folks exerting inappropriate influence based on their affiliated interest, and if there ever was I think it would be easy to identify and address. As far as don't need more I don't agree with that either, if there are folks contributing and doing the work then there's no reason not to add them. Cinder IMO does NOT have an excess of reviewers by a very very long stretch. The criteria here should be review consistency and quality as well as knowledge of the project, nothing more nothing less. If there's an objection to the individuals participation or contribution that's fine, but company affiliation should have no bearing. +1 The people that do great work on reviews, should really be your review team, regardless of affiliation. +1 (also +1 to what Mark and Dan said) FWIW - _all_ of the core members of the Infra team were HP for quite a while - and everyone on the team was quite good about always wearing their upstream hat. We're split 50/50 now - HP and OpenStack Foundation. I'd LOVE more diversity, but we would certainly die if we had a diversity requirement. You've all made good points, and I agree with them. When I saw the nomination, I had some concerns due to the reasons I stated previously, but what you have all said makes sense. Thanks for the patient explanations. In terms of this specific nomination, according to the review statistics that John posted in the other thread[1], Ollie is an obvious candidate for core, and has my support. Thanks all, Avishay [1] http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/cinder-reviewers-30.txt ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack] [cinder] Proposal for Ollie Leahy to join cinder-core
Walter A. Boring IV walter.bor...@hp.com wrote on 07/18/2013 12:04:07 AM: snip +1 to Ollie from me. +1 to John's points. If a company is colluding with other core members, from the same company, to do bad things within a project, it should become pretty obvious at some point and the project's community should take action. If someone is putting in an extra effort to provide quality code and reviews on a regular basis, then why wouldn't we want that person on the team? Besides, being a core member really just means that you are required to do reviews and help out with the community. You do get some gerrit privileges for reviews, but that's about it. I for one think that we absolutely can use more core members to help out with reviews during the milestone deadlines :) Walt, As I said, I really wasn't worried about anyone colluding or doing bad things. As you said, that would be obvious and could be handled. I was concerned about creating a limited view, and I thank you and everyone who replied for easing those concerns. And BTW, I don't think there is an HP conspiracy to take over Cinder and make it FC-only :) Thanks, Avishay ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
