Hello Antoine, We've recently performed a thorough test of using S3 as a secondary storage on our QA platform using the 4.17.0 release. We've tried with 2 S3 Providers (Ceph, OpenIO), without any success in both cases. We will post one (or more) issues in the future concerning this subject, in the meantime here's what ve found:
- The current S3 implementation doesn't support any advanced parameters (such as region), which prevents it from working properly with S3 providers that require the V4 signature. The culprit being a deprecated use of the AWS S3 SDK for Java. - The following API call: https://cloudstack.apache.org/api/apidocs-4.17/apis/updateCloudToUseObjectStore.html, does work, however as there is no validation on any of the provided parameters, you are likely to get an NPE if you happen to miss one of them. Also, this call is not reversible, even in the case of an error. What it does under the hood is that it converts your current secondary storage to a NFS staging store, and adds an Image store of type S3, which will then initiate the download of all images present in your secondary (making them unavailable until downloaded). - Finally, the current implementation uses an asynchronous upload with a "ProgressListener" that discards any errors (aka exceptions) thrown to it. In practice you will see "Download error" on your templates, without any errors in the logs (empty error message). So basically it will either work fine if your S3 implementation works with it, or fails without any possibility for you to know why. Please note, this is not a critique of the feature (which I'm sure was designed and tested against AWS S3 specifically, not S3 compatible APIs), this is simply what we've found about the state of the current implementation. Regards, Vladimir On Mon, 27 Jun 2022 at 16:56, Levin Ng <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Antoine, > > I’m looking for same question too. I’ve tested few s3fs implementation and > only found rclone mount and juicejfs is working properly. However it require > a huge set of buffering area to store intermediate images. > > Regards, > Levin > > From: Antoine Boucher <[email protected]> > Date: Monday, 27 June 2022 at 21:02 > To: users <[email protected]> > Subject: Using S3 Storage for Secondary storage > Hello, > > We are consolidating our backup storage to S3 using MinIO. It appears that > migration from NFS-based secondary storage to S3 is none trivial task since > both can not coexist for the transition period. Has anyone done the > transition? We can’t lose the existing data from the current Secondary NFS > storage data. > > Alternatively, would an s3fs mounted on an NFS share work adequately for > CloudStack‘s requirement? > > Regards, > > Antoine -- *CONFIDENTIALITY AND DISCLAIMER NOTICE: * This email is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and/or otherwise authorized personnel. The information contained herein and attached is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please be advised that viewing this message and any attachments, as well as copying, forwarding, printing, and disseminating any information related to this email is prohibited, and that you should not take any action based on the content of this email and/or its attachments. If you received this message in error, please contact the sender and destroy all copies of this email and any attachment. Please note that the views and opinions expressed herein are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the company. While antivirus protection tools have been employed, you should check this email and attachments for the presence of viruses. No warranties or assurances are made in relation to the safety and content of this email and attachments. The Company accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by or contained in this email and attachments. No liability is accepted for any consequences arising from this email. *AVIS DE CONFIDENTIALITÉ ET DE NON RESPONSABILITE* : Ce courriel, ainsi que toute pièce jointe, est confidentiel et peut être protégé par le secret professionnel. Si vous n’en êtes pas le destinataire visé, veuillez en aviser l’expéditeur immédiatement et le supprimer. Vous ne devez pas le copier, ni l’utiliser à quelque fin que ce soit, ni divulguer son contenu à qui que ce soit. BSO se réserve le droit de contrôler toute transmission qui passe par son réseau. Veuillez noter que les opinions exprimées dans cet e-mail sont uniquement celles de l'auteur et ne reflètent pas nécessairement celles de la société. Bien que des outils de protection antivirus aient été utilisés, vous devez vérifier cet e-mail et les pièces jointes pour toute présence de virus. Aucune garantie ou assurance n'est donnée concernant la sécurité et le contenu de cet e-mail et de ses pièces jointes. La Société décline toute responsabilité pour tout dommage causé par tout virus transmis par ou contenu dans cet e-mail et ses pièces jointes. Aucune responsabilité n'est acceptée pour les conséquences découlant de cet e-mail.
