Open Stack

I concur, we have run into this several times as well. Why not leave it to
the OS and use FS labels to mount instead of direct device paths?



On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Abel Lopez <alopgeek at gmail.com> wrote:

> I've been dealing with lots of confusion from users, mainly because the
> mountpoint they specify in volume-attach really has no bearing onto what
> the guest OS does with the volume.
>
> Here's some examples:
> m1.tiny has no ephemeral disk, Horizon "Suggests" /dev/vdc as the
> mountpoint. The OS assigns the volume to the next available device, which
> is /dev/vdb
>
> a flavor with an existing (perhaps unused) ephemeral disk at /dev/vdb, and
> the user specifies /dev/vdb in volume-attach, OS will use the next
> available device, and confuse the user.
>
> Windows guests - have no /dev/ - volumes show up as disk1, disk2, etc.
>
> Having the mountpoint seems to do more to confuse the users. This is an
> option that really doesn't seem to bring anything to the table. We should
> really just leave device assignment to the guest OS, no?
>
> Thoughts?
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20130404/d0144990/attachment.html>