<div dir="ltr">Yes. Really three(?) different beasts, here.<div><br></div><div>Ephemeral storage is exactly that. It must contain nothing that needs to be preserved. So you can factor this out into three main cases:</div><div><br></div><div>1. Instance boots from ephemeral storage. All persistent state is not owned by the instance.</div><div>2. Instance boots from ephemeral storage. Some/all persistent state is in an additional attached Cinder volume.</div><div>3. Instance boots from a persistent Cinder volume, which contains persistent state.</div><div><br></div><div>In (1) you are closest to a built-for-cloud application. The persistent state might be in cloud-object storage, or in some other net-accessible service. If the instance fails, simply boot another. No preservation of instance-state needed.</div><div><br></div><div>In (2) you have a more traditional sort of application, deployed efficiently in the cloud. Failover consists of spinning up a new instance, attached to the volume with state.</div><div><br></div><div>In (3) you have a traditional sort of application, simply deployed in the cloud. Less efficient, but less work needed. Failover consists of spinning up a new instance, booted off the Cinder volume.</div><div><br></div><div>NOTE: In *no* case are you looking to preserve the state of the ephemeral volume!!</div><div><br></div><div>If you need to preserve the volume, it must be in Cinder. It must *not* be ephemeral. Ephemeral means exactly that.</div><div><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">Excerpts from Adam Lawson's message of 2014-09-26 14:43:40 -0700:<br><span class="">\> I'm looking for discussions/plans re VM continuity.<br>
><br>
> I.e. Protection for instances using ephemeral storage against host failures<br>
> or auto-failover capability for instances on hosts where the host suffers<br>
> from an attitude problem?<br>
><br>
> I know fail-overs are supported and I'm quite certain auto-fail-overs are<br>
> possible in the event of a host failure (hosting instances not using shared<br>
> storage). I just can't find where this has been addressed/discussed.<br>
</span></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div>