Open Stack

Well,in my opinion,the BlockDeviceDriver is more suitable than any other solution for data processing scenarios.Does the community will agree to merge the BlockDeviceDriver to the Cinder repository again if our company hold the maintainer and CI?
 
 
------------------ Original ------------------
From: "Gorka Eguileor"; 
Date: 2018年7月16日(星期一) 下午5:20
To: "OpenStack Developmen"; 
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder] about block device driver

 
On 16/07, Rambo wrote:
> Hi,all
>
>
>      In the Cinder repository, I noticed that the BlockDeviceDriver driver is being deprecated, and was eventually be removed with the Queens release.
>
>
> https://github.com/openstack/cinder/blob/stable/ocata/cinder/volume/drivers/block_device.py
>
>
> In my use case, the instances using Cinder perform intense I/O, thus iSCSI or LVM is not a viable option - benchmarked them several times, since Juno, unsatisfactory results.For data processing scenarios is always better to use local storage than any SAN/NAS solution.
>
>
> So I felt a great need to know why we deprecated it.If there has any better one to replace it? What do you suggest to use once BlockDeviceDriver is removed?Can you tell me about this?Thank you very much!
>
> Best Regards
> Rambo

Hi,

If I remember correctly the driver was deprecated because it had no
maintainer or CI.  In Cinder we require our drivers to have both,
otherwise we can't guarantee that they actually work or that anyone will
fix it if it gets broken.

Cheers,
Gorka.

__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20180716/009c39aa/attachment.html>