<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace">Hey,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace">
There have been a couple of block storage related patches in Nova lately and I wanted to get some discussion going and also maybe increase some awareness on some efforts that were discussed at the last summit. To catch up a bit here's the etherpad from the summit session [1].</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace">First off, there was a patch to move Nova's LVM code in to OSLO (here [2]). This one is probably my fault for not having enough awareness out there regarding our plans/goals with brick. I'd like to hear from folks if the brick approach is not sufficient or if there's some other reason that it's not desirable (hopefully it's just that folks didn't know about it). </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace">For reference/review the latest version of the brick/local_dev/lvm code is here: [4].</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace">One question we haven't answered on this yet is where this code should ultimately live. Should it be in OSLO, or should it be a separate library that's part of Cinder and can be imported by other projects. I'm mixed on this for a number of reasons but I think either approach is fine.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace">The next item around this topic that came up was a patch to add support for using RBD for local volumes in Nova (here [3]). You'll notice a number of folks mentioned brick on this, and I think that's the correct answer. At the same time while I think that's the right answer long term I also would hate to see this feature NOT go in to H just because folks weren't aware of what was going on in Brick. It's a bit late in the cycle so my thought on this is that I'd like to see this resubmitted using the brick/common approach. If that can't be done between now and the feature freeze for H3 I'd rather see the patch go in as is than have the feature not be present at all for another release. We can then address this when we get a better story in place for brick.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace">
[1] <a href="https://etherpad.openstack.org/havana-cinder-local-storage-library" style="font-family:arial">https://etherpad.openstack.org/havana-cinder-local-storage-library</a></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace">
[2] <a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/40795/" style="font-family:arial">https://review.openstack.org/#/c/40795/</a></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace">[3] <a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/36042/15" style="font-family:arial">https://review.openstack.org/#/c/36042/15</a></div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace">[4] <a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/38172/11/cinder/brick/local_dev/lvm.py" style="font-family:arial">https://review.openstack.org/#/c/38172/11/cinder/brick/local_dev/lvm.py</a></div>
</div>