[openstack-dev] [cinder] [nova] whether the ServiceGroup in Cinder is necessary

li.yuanzhen at zte.com.cn li.yuanzhen at zte.com.cn
Mon Dec 28 06:29:57 UTC 2015

Hi hao wang,

Firstly, I agree with you that healthy backend is a requirement for 
volumes, as the same as service-up. So, monitor the state of backend is 

While, ServiceGroup is only used for detecting state of service quickly, 
So whether
backend is up or not is not taken into consideration for ServiceGroup.

So, I think there is no priority between them. 

Thank you.

> hi, Janice
> This idea seems to me that is useful to detect the state of
> cinder-volume process more quickly, but I feel there is another issue
> that if the back-end device go to fail you still
> can't keep cloud in ha or create volume successfully since the service
> is up but device is down.
> So, what I want to say is we maybe need to consider to detect and
> report the device state priority[1] and then consider to improve
> service if we need that.

> [1]https://review.openstack.org/#/c/252921/

ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail (and any attachment transmitted herewith) is privileged and confidential and is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s).  If you are not an intended recipient, any disclosure, reproduction, distribution or other dissemination or use of the information contained is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this mail in error, please delete it and notify us immediately.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20151228/2bb4ef9e/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list