[openstack-dev] [nova] Plan to consolidate FS-style libvirt volume drivers under a common base class
mriedem at linux.vnet.ibm.com
Wed Jun 17 16:32:55 UTC 2015
On 6/17/2015 8:14 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote:
> On 17 June 2015 at 15:36, Dmitry Guryanov <dguryanov at parallels.com
> <mailto:dguryanov at parallels.com>> wrote:
> On 06/17/2015 02:14 PM, Duncan Thomas wrote:
> On 17 June 2015 at 00:21, Matt Riedemann
> <mriedem at linux.vnet.ibm.com <mailto:mriedem at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> <mailto:mriedem at linux.vnet.ibm.com
> <mailto:mriedem at linux.vnet.ibm.com>>> wrote:
> The NFS, GlusterFS, SMBFS, and Quobyte libvirt volume
> drivers are
> all very similar.
> I want to extract a common base class that abstracts some
> of the
> common code and then let the sub-classes provide overrides
> As part of this, I'm wondering if we could just have a single
> 'mount_point_base' config option rather than one per
> backend like
> we have today:
> With libvirt you can only have one of these drivers
> configured per
> compute host right? So it seems to make sense that we
> could have
> one option used for all 4 different driver implementations and
> reduce some of the config option noise.
> I can't claim to have tried it, but from a cinder PoV there is
> stopping you having both e.g. an NFS and a gluster backend at
> the same
> time, and I'd expect nova to work with it. If it doesn't, I'd
> it a bug.
> I agree, if 2 volume backends will use the same share definition,
> like "10.10.2.3:/public" you'll get the same mountpoint for them.
> I meant that you should be able to have two complete separate backends,
> with two different mount points (e.g. /mnt/nfs, /mnt/gluster) and use
> both simultaneously, e.g. two different volume types.
> Duncan Thomas
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
OK, I forgot about the multiple volume backend ability in Cinder so I'll
drop the idea of having a single mount_point_base option (danpb also
mentioned this in this thread).
I'll need to remember to put a comment in the base class about why we
have similar but different options here.
More information about the OpenStack-dev