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

[hao wang]

Hi, Duncan

2015-11-30 15:54 GMT+08:00 Duncan Thomas :
> Hi WangHao
>
> This was quite thoroughly discussed during the early discussions on
> replication. The general statement was 'not yet'. Getting any kind of
> workable replication API has proven to be very, very difficult to get right
> - we won't know for another full cycle whether we've actually gotten it
> somewhere near right, as operators start to deploy it. Piling more feature
> in the replication API before a) it has been used by operators and b)
> storage vendors have implemented what we already has would IMO be a mistake.

I agree with you, in my mind, using replication what we have is first
thing we should done,
improve it much better is second thing, and then we will add another
new features
one by one stably.

> None of this means that more DR interfaces don't belong in cinder, just that
> getting them right, getting them universal and getting them useful is quite
> a hard problem, and not one we should be in a rush to solve. Particularly as
> DR and replication is still a niche area of cinder, and we still have major
> issues in our basic functionality.

Yes, this will convince me about DR in Cinder, very clearly, thanks.
>
> On 30 November 2015 at 03:45, hao wang  wrote:
>>
>> Sean and Michal,
>>
>> In fact, there is a reason that I ask this question. Recently I have a
>> confusion about if cinder should provide the ability of Disaster
>> Recovery to storage resources, like volume. I mean we have volume
>> replication v1, but for DR, specially DR between two independent
>> OpenStack sites(production and DR site), I feel we still need more
>> features to support it, for example consistency group for replication,
>> etc. I'm not sure if those features belong in Cinder or some new
>> project for DR.
>>
>> BR
>> WangHao
>>
>> 2015-11-30 3:02 GMT+08:00 Sean McGinnis :
>> > On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 11:44:19AM +, Dulko, Michal wrote:
>> >> On Sat, 2015-11-28 at 10:56 +0800, hao wang wrote:
>> >> > Hi guys,
>> >> >
>> >> > I notice nova have a clarification of project scope:
>> >> > http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/project_scope.html
>> >> >
>> >> > I want to find cinder's, but failed,  do you know where to find it?
>> >> >
>> >> > It's important to let developers know what feature should be
>> >> > introduced into cinder and what shouldn't.
>> >> >
>> >> > BR
>> >> > Wang Hao
>> >>
>> >> I believe Nova team needed to formalize the scop to have an explanation
>> >> for all the "this doesn't belong in Nova" comments on feature requests.
>> >> Does Cinder suffer from similar problems? From my perspective it's not
>> >> critically needed.
>> >
>> > I agree. I haven't seen a need for something like that with Cinder. Wang
>> > Hao, is there a reason you feel you need that?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > __
>> > 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
>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> 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
>

__
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]Do we have project scope for cinder?

[Walter A. Boring IV]

As a side note to the DR discussion here, there was a session in Tokyo 
that talked about a new

DR project called Smaug.   You can see their mission statement here:
https://launchpad.net/smaug

https://github.com/openstack/smaug

There is another service in the making called DRagon:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upCzuFnswtw
http://www.slideshare.net/AlonMarx/dragon-and-cinder-v-brownbag-54639869

Yes that's 2 DR like service starting in OpenStack that are related to 
dragons.


Walt



Sean and Michal,

In fact, there is a reason that I ask this question. Recently I have a
confusion about if cinder should provide the ability of Disaster
Recovery to storage resources, like volume. I mean we have volume
replication v1, but for DR, specially DR between two independent
OpenStack sites(production and DR site), I feel we still need more
features to support it, for example consistency group for replication,
etc. I'm not sure if those features belong in Cinder or some new
project for DR.

BR
WangHao

2015-11-30 3:02 GMT+08:00 Sean McGinnis :

On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 11:44:19AM +, Dulko, Michal wrote:

On Sat, 2015-11-28 at 10:56 +0800, hao wang wrote:

Hi guys,

I notice nova have a clarification of project scope:
http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/project_scope.html

I want to find cinder's, but failed,  do you know where to find it?

It's important to let developers know what feature should be
introduced into cinder and what shouldn't.

BR
Wang Hao

I believe Nova team needed to formalize the scop to have an explanation
for all the "this doesn't belong in Nova" comments on feature requests.
Does Cinder suffer from similar problems? From my perspective it's not
critically needed.

I agree. I haven't seen a need for something like that with Cinder. Wang
Hao, is there a reason you feel you need that?


__
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
.




__
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]Do we have project scope for cinder?

[yang, xing]

Hi Wang Hao,

Here¹s a Cinder spec in review on replicating a group of volumes:

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/229722/

It is a not an easy problem to solve.  Not that we should rush on this
problem, but we should start thinking about how to solve this as some
backends can only replicate a CG or a pool of volumes.

Thanks,
Xing



On 11/30/15, 4:51 AM, "hao wang"  wrote:

>Hi, Duncan
>
>2015-11-30 15:54 GMT+08:00 Duncan Thomas :
>> Hi WangHao
>>
>> This was quite thoroughly discussed during the early discussions on
>> replication. The general statement was 'not yet'. Getting any kind of
>> workable replication API has proven to be very, very difficult to get
>>right
>> - we won't know for another full cycle whether we've actually gotten it
>> somewhere near right, as operators start to deploy it. Piling more
>>feature
>> in the replication API before a) it has been used by operators and b)
>> storage vendors have implemented what we already has would IMO be a
>>mistake.
>
>I agree with you, in my mind, using replication what we have is first
>thing we should done,
>improve it much better is second thing, and then we will add another
>new features
>one by one stably.
>
>> None of this means that more DR interfaces don't belong in cinder, just
>>that
>> getting them right, getting them universal and getting them useful is
>>quite
>> a hard problem, and not one we should be in a rush to solve.
>>Particularly as
>> DR and replication is still a niche area of cinder, and we still have
>>major
>> issues in our basic functionality.
>
>Yes, this will convince me about DR in Cinder, very clearly, thanks.
>>
>> On 30 November 2015 at 03:45, hao wang  wrote:
>>>
>>> Sean and Michal,
>>>
>>> In fact, there is a reason that I ask this question. Recently I have a
>>> confusion about if cinder should provide the ability of Disaster
>>> Recovery to storage resources, like volume. I mean we have volume
>>> replication v1, but for DR, specially DR between two independent
>>> OpenStack sites(production and DR site), I feel we still need more
>>> features to support it, for example consistency group for replication,
>>> etc. I'm not sure if those features belong in Cinder or some new
>>> project for DR.
>>>
>>> BR
>>> WangHao
>>>
>>> 2015-11-30 3:02 GMT+08:00 Sean McGinnis :
>>> > On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 11:44:19AM +, Dulko, Michal wrote:
>>> >> On Sat, 2015-11-28 at 10:56 +0800, hao wang wrote:
>>> >> > Hi guys,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I notice nova have a clarification of project scope:
>>> >> > http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/project_scope.html
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I want to find cinder's, but failed,  do you know where to find
>>>it?
>>> >> >
>>> >> > It's important to let developers know what feature should be
>>> >> > introduced into cinder and what shouldn't.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > BR
>>> >> > Wang Hao
>>> >>
>>> >> I believe Nova team needed to formalize the scop to have an
>>>explanation
>>> >> for all the "this doesn't belong in Nova" comments on feature
>>>requests.
>>> >> Does Cinder suffer from similar problems? From my perspective it's
>>>not
>>> >> critically needed.
>>> >
>>> > I agree. I haven't seen a need for something like that with Cinder.
>>>Wang
>>> > Hao, is there a reason you feel you need that?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > 
>>>
>>>__
>>> > 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> 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
>>
>
>__
>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

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

[Anita Kuno]

On 11/29/2015 02:02 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 11:44:19AM +, Dulko, Michal wrote:
>> On Sat, 2015-11-28 at 10:56 +0800, hao wang wrote:
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> I notice nova have a clarification of project scope:
>>> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/project_scope.html
>>>
>>> I want to find cinder's, but failed,  do you know where to find it?
>>>
>>> It's important to let developers know what feature should be
>>> introduced into cinder and what shouldn't.
>>>
>>> BR
>>> Wang Hao
>>
>> I believe Nova team needed to formalize the scop to have an explanation
>> for all the "this doesn't belong in Nova" comments on feature requests.
>> Does Cinder suffer from similar problems? From my perspective it's not
>> critically needed.
> 
> I agree. I haven't seen a need for something like that with Cinder. Wang
> Hao, is there a reason you feel you need that?
> 

For reference here is the Cinder mission statement:
http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/reference/projects.yaml#n273

All projects listed in the governance repository reference/projects.yaml
have a mission statement, I do encourage folks thinking about starting a
project to look at the mission statements here first as there may
already be an effort ongoing with which you can align your work.

Thanks Wang Hao,
Anita.

__
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]Do we have project scope for cinder?

[hao wang]

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

So we can see there are more and more attention to DR,  as discussed
here, it's a complex issue, so I feel cinder will
provide basic ability to support DR, and Smaug or DRagon, will use
those APIs(and Nova's APIs, Heat's APIs, etc.) to
implement the DR goal for OpenStack resources.

2015-12-01 0:50 GMT+08:00 Walter A. Boring IV :
> As a side note to the DR discussion here, there was a session in Tokyo that
> talked about a new
> DR project called Smaug.   You can see their mission statement here:
> https://launchpad.net/smaug
>
> https://github.com/openstack/smaug
>
> There is another service in the making called DRagon:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upCzuFnswtw
> http://www.slideshare.net/AlonMarx/dragon-and-cinder-v-brownbag-54639869
>
> Yes that's 2 DR like service starting in OpenStack that are related to
> dragons.
>
> Walt
>
>
>> Sean and Michal,
>>
>> In fact, there is a reason that I ask this question. Recently I have a
>> confusion about if cinder should provide the ability of Disaster
>> Recovery to storage resources, like volume. I mean we have volume
>> replication v1, but for DR, specially DR between two independent
>> OpenStack sites(production and DR site), I feel we still need more
>> features to support it, for example consistency group for replication,
>> etc. I'm not sure if those features belong in Cinder or some new
>> project for DR.
>>
>> BR
>> WangHao
>>
>> 2015-11-30 3:02 GMT+08:00 Sean McGinnis :
>>>
>>> On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 11:44:19AM +, Dulko, Michal wrote:

 On Sat, 2015-11-28 at 10:56 +0800, hao wang wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>
> I notice nova have a clarification of project scope:
> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/project_scope.html
>
> I want to find cinder's, but failed,  do you know where to find it?
>
> It's important to let developers know what feature should be
> introduced into cinder and what shouldn't.
>
> BR
> Wang Hao

 I believe Nova team needed to formalize the scop to have an explanation
 for all the "this doesn't belong in Nova" comments on feature requests.
 Does Cinder suffer from similar problems? From my perspective it's not
 critically needed.
>>>
>>> I agree. I haven't seen a need for something like that with Cinder. Wang
>>> Hao, is there a reason you feel you need that?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> __
>>> 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
>> .
>>
>
>
> __
> 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

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

[hao wang]

Thanks very much, Anita, very usefully information, I will check it.

2015-11-30 23:36 GMT+08:00 Anita Kuno :
> On 11/29/2015 02:02 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 11:44:19AM +, Dulko, Michal wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2015-11-28 at 10:56 +0800, hao wang wrote:
 Hi guys,

 I notice nova have a clarification of project scope:
 http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/project_scope.html

 I want to find cinder's, but failed,  do you know where to find it?

 It's important to let developers know what feature should be
 introduced into cinder and what shouldn't.

 BR
 Wang Hao
>>>
>>> I believe Nova team needed to formalize the scop to have an explanation
>>> for all the "this doesn't belong in Nova" comments on feature requests.
>>> Does Cinder suffer from similar problems? From my perspective it's not
>>> critically needed.
>>
>> I agree. I haven't seen a need for something like that with Cinder. Wang
>> Hao, is there a reason you feel you need that?
>>
>
> For reference here is the Cinder mission statement:
> http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/reference/projects.yaml#n273
>
> All projects listed in the governance repository reference/projects.yaml
> have a mission statement, I do encourage folks thinking about starting a
> project to look at the mission statements here first as there may
> already be an effort ongoing with which you can align your work.
>
> Thanks Wang Hao,
> Anita.
>
> __
> 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

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

[hao wang]

Thanks Xing Yang, I have noticed this spec, it's glad to see you to
start this work.

2015-11-30 23:10 GMT+08:00 yang, xing :
> Hi Wang Hao,
>
> Here¹s a Cinder spec in review on replicating a group of volumes:
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/229722/
>
> It is a not an easy problem to solve.  Not that we should rush on this
> problem, but we should start thinking about how to solve this as some
> backends can only replicate a CG or a pool of volumes.
>
> Thanks,
> Xing
>
>
>
> On 11/30/15, 4:51 AM, "hao wang"  wrote:
>
>>Hi, Duncan
>>
>>2015-11-30 15:54 GMT+08:00 Duncan Thomas :
>>> Hi WangHao
>>>
>>> This was quite thoroughly discussed during the early discussions on
>>> replication. The general statement was 'not yet'. Getting any kind of
>>> workable replication API has proven to be very, very difficult to get
>>>right
>>> - we won't know for another full cycle whether we've actually gotten it
>>> somewhere near right, as operators start to deploy it. Piling more
>>>feature
>>> in the replication API before a) it has been used by operators and b)
>>> storage vendors have implemented what we already has would IMO be a
>>>mistake.
>>
>>I agree with you, in my mind, using replication what we have is first
>>thing we should done,
>>improve it much better is second thing, and then we will add another
>>new features
>>one by one stably.
>>
>>> None of this means that more DR interfaces don't belong in cinder, just
>>>that
>>> getting them right, getting them universal and getting them useful is
>>>quite
>>> a hard problem, and not one we should be in a rush to solve.
>>>Particularly as
>>> DR and replication is still a niche area of cinder, and we still have
>>>major
>>> issues in our basic functionality.
>>
>>Yes, this will convince me about DR in Cinder, very clearly, thanks.
>>>
>>> On 30 November 2015 at 03:45, hao wang  wrote:

 Sean and Michal,

 In fact, there is a reason that I ask this question. Recently I have a
 confusion about if cinder should provide the ability of Disaster
 Recovery to storage resources, like volume. I mean we have volume
 replication v1, but for DR, specially DR between two independent
 OpenStack sites(production and DR site), I feel we still need more
 features to support it, for example consistency group for replication,
 etc. I'm not sure if those features belong in Cinder or some new
 project for DR.

 BR
 WangHao

 2015-11-30 3:02 GMT+08:00 Sean McGinnis :
 > On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 11:44:19AM +, Dulko, Michal wrote:
 >> On Sat, 2015-11-28 at 10:56 +0800, hao wang wrote:
 >> > Hi guys,
 >> >
 >> > I notice nova have a clarification of project scope:
 >> > http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/project_scope.html
 >> >
 >> > I want to find cinder's, but failed,  do you know where to find
it?
 >> >
 >> > It's important to let developers know what feature should be
 >> > introduced into cinder and what shouldn't.
 >> >
 >> > BR
 >> > Wang Hao
 >>
 >> I believe Nova team needed to formalize the scop to have an
explanation
 >> for all the "this doesn't belong in Nova" comments on feature
requests.
 >> Does Cinder suffer from similar problems? From my perspective it's
not
 >> critically needed.
 >
 > I agree. I haven't seen a need for something like that with Cinder.
Wang
 > Hao, is there a reason you feel you need that?
 >
 >
 >
 >

__
 > 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> --
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>__
>>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]Do we have project scope for cinder?

[Sean McGinnis]

On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 11:44:19AM +, Dulko, Michal wrote:
> On Sat, 2015-11-28 at 10:56 +0800, hao wang wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> > 
> > I notice nova have a clarification of project scope:
> > http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/project_scope.html
> > 
> > I want to find cinder's, but failed,  do you know where to find it?
> > 
> > It's important to let developers know what feature should be
> > introduced into cinder and what shouldn't.
> > 
> > BR
> > Wang Hao
> 
> I believe Nova team needed to formalize the scop to have an explanation
> for all the "this doesn't belong in Nova" comments on feature requests.
> Does Cinder suffer from similar problems? From my perspective it's not
> critically needed.

I agree. I haven't seen a need for something like that with Cinder. Wang
Hao, is there a reason you feel you need that?


__
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]Do we have project scope for cinder?

[Dulko, Michal]

On Sat, 2015-11-28 at 10:56 +0800, hao wang wrote:
> Hi guys,
> 
> I notice nova have a clarification of project scope:
> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/project_scope.html
> 
> I want to find cinder's, but failed,  do you know where to find it?
> 
> It's important to let developers know what feature should be
> introduced into cinder and what shouldn't.
> 
> BR
> Wang Hao

I believe Nova team needed to formalize the scop to have an explanation
for all the "this doesn't belong in Nova" comments on feature requests.
Does Cinder suffer from similar problems? From my perspective it's not
critically needed.
__
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]Do we have project scope for cinder?

[hao wang]

Sean and Michal,

In fact, there is a reason that I ask this question. Recently I have a
confusion about if cinder should provide the ability of Disaster
Recovery to storage resources, like volume. I mean we have volume
replication v1, but for DR, specially DR between two independent
OpenStack sites(production and DR site), I feel we still need more
features to support it, for example consistency group for replication,
etc. I'm not sure if those features belong in Cinder or some new
project for DR.

BR
WangHao

2015-11-30 3:02 GMT+08:00 Sean McGinnis :
> On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 11:44:19AM +, Dulko, Michal wrote:
>> On Sat, 2015-11-28 at 10:56 +0800, hao wang wrote:
>> > Hi guys,
>> >
>> > I notice nova have a clarification of project scope:
>> > http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/project_scope.html
>> >
>> > I want to find cinder's, but failed,  do you know where to find it?
>> >
>> > It's important to let developers know what feature should be
>> > introduced into cinder and what shouldn't.
>> >
>> > BR
>> > Wang Hao
>>
>> I believe Nova team needed to formalize the scop to have an explanation
>> for all the "this doesn't belong in Nova" comments on feature requests.
>> Does Cinder suffer from similar problems? From my perspective it's not
>> critically needed.
>
> I agree. I haven't seen a need for something like that with Cinder. Wang
> Hao, is there a reason you feel you need that?
>
>
> __
> 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

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

[hao wang]

Hi  Philipp,

2015-11-30 14:36 GMT+08:00 Philipp Marek :
> Hi Hao Wang,
>
>> In fact, there is a reason that I ask this question. Recently I have a
>> confusion about if cinder should provide the ability of Disaster
>> Recovery to storage resources, like volume. I mean we have volume
>> replication v1, but for DR, specially DR between two independent
>> OpenStack sites(production and DR site), I feel we still need more
>> features to support it, for example consistency group for replication,
>> etc.
> I'm currently developing consistency groups for the DRBD volume driver.
>
>
> The only way it can do replication *is* for a consistency group as a whole,
> so that feature will be available soonish - if you don't care that
> Cinder/Openstack knows nothing about the ongoing replication.
>
Yes, recently I have some ideas about the DR, including the CG of replication.
And I heard a different voice that we maybe shouldn't introduce DR into cinder,
but on top of cinder, like another new project to focus on DR. So I want to get
some opinions from our guys.
>
>> I'm not sure if those features belong in Cinder or some new
>> project for DR.
> IMO this belongs to Cinder.

This is my point of view too,  I think Cinder should provide the basic
and atomical
API to support DR function, of course the orchestration of DR process
could be in Heat
or some DR management system.
> __
> 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

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

[Duncan Thomas]

Hi WangHao

This was quite thoroughly discussed during the early discussions on
replication. The general statement was 'not yet'. Getting any kind of
workable replication API has proven to be very, very difficult to get right
- we won't know for another full cycle whether we've actually gotten it
somewhere near right, as operators start to deploy it. Piling more feature
in the replication API before a) it has been used by operators and b)
storage vendors have implemented what we already has would IMO be a mistake.

None of this means that more DR interfaces don't belong in cinder, just
that getting them right, getting them universal and getting them useful is
quite a hard problem, and not one we should be in a rush to solve.
Particularly as DR and replication is still a niche area of cinder, and we
still have major issues in our basic functionality.

On 30 November 2015 at 03:45, hao wang  wrote:

> Sean and Michal,
>
> In fact, there is a reason that I ask this question. Recently I have a
> confusion about if cinder should provide the ability of Disaster
> Recovery to storage resources, like volume. I mean we have volume
> replication v1, but for DR, specially DR between two independent
> OpenStack sites(production and DR site), I feel we still need more
> features to support it, for example consistency group for replication,
> etc. I'm not sure if those features belong in Cinder or some new
> project for DR.
>
> BR
> WangHao
>
> 2015-11-30 3:02 GMT+08:00 Sean McGinnis :
> > On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 11:44:19AM +, Dulko, Michal wrote:
> >> On Sat, 2015-11-28 at 10:56 +0800, hao wang wrote:
> >> > Hi guys,
> >> >
> >> > I notice nova have a clarification of project scope:
> >> > http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/project_scope.html
> >> >
> >> > I want to find cinder's, but failed,  do you know where to find it?
> >> >
> >> > It's important to let developers know what feature should be
> >> > introduced into cinder and what shouldn't.
> >> >
> >> > BR
> >> > Wang Hao
> >>
> >> I believe Nova team needed to formalize the scop to have an explanation
> >> for all the "this doesn't belong in Nova" comments on feature requests.
> >> Does Cinder suffer from similar problems? From my perspective it's not
> >> critically needed.
> >
> > I agree. I haven't seen a need for something like that with Cinder. Wang
> > Hao, is there a reason you feel you need that?
> >
> >
> >
> __
> > 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
>



-- 
-- 
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

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

[Philipp Marek]

Hi Hao Wang,

> In fact, there is a reason that I ask this question. Recently I have a
> confusion about if cinder should provide the ability of Disaster
> Recovery to storage resources, like volume. I mean we have volume
> replication v1, but for DR, specially DR between two independent
> OpenStack sites(production and DR site), I feel we still need more
> features to support it, for example consistency group for replication,
> etc.
I'm currently developing consistency groups for the DRBD volume driver.


The only way it can do replication *is* for a consistency group as a whole, 
so that feature will be available soonish - if you don't care that 
Cinder/Openstack knows nothing about the ongoing replication.


> I'm not sure if those features belong in Cinder or some new
> project for DR.
IMO this belongs to Cinder.


__
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] [cinder]Do we have project scope for cinder?

[hao wang]

Hi guys,

I notice nova have a clarification of project scope:
http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/project_scope.html

I want to find cinder's, but failed,  do you know where to find it?

It's important to let developers know what feature should be
introduced into cinder and what shouldn't.

BR
Wang Hao

__
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