Open Stack

On 23/12/13 09:00 -0500, Jay Pipes wrote:
>On 12/23/2013 08:48 AM, Mark Washenberger wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 4:57 AM, Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com
>><mailto:jaypipes at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>    On 12/23/2013 05:42 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
>>
>>        Flavio Percoco wrote:
>>
>>            On 21/12/13 00:41 -0500, Jay Pipes wrote:
>>
>>                Cinder is for block storage. Images are just a bunch of
>>                blocks, and
>>                all the store drivers do is take a chunked stream of
>>                input blocks and
>>                store them to disk/swift/s3/rbd/toaster and stream those
>>                blocks back
>>                out again.
>>
>>                So, perhaps the most appropriate place for this is in
>>                Cinder-land.
>>
>>
>>            This is an interesting suggestion.
>>
>>            I wouldn't mind putting it there, although I still prefer it
>>            to be
>>            under glance for historical reasons and because Glance team
>>            knows that
>>            code.
>>
>>            How would it work if this lib falls under Block Storage program?
>>
>>            Should the glance team be added as core contributors of this
>>            project?
>>            or Just some of them interested in contributing / reviewing
>>            those
>>            patches?
>>
>>            Thanks for the suggestion. I'd like John and Mark to weigh
>>            in too.
>>
>>
>>        Programs are a team of people on a specific mission. If the
>>        stores code
>>        is maintained by a completely separate group (glance devs), then it
>>        doesn't belong in the Block Storage program... unless the Cinder
>>        devs
>>        intend to adopt it over the long run (and therefore the
>>        contributors of
>>        the Block Storage program form a happy family rather than two
>>        separate
>>        groups).
>>
>>
>>    Understood. The reason I offered this up as a suggestion is that
>>    currently Cinder uses the Glance REST API to store and retrieve
>>    volume snapshots, and it would be more efficient to just give Cinder
>>    the ability to directly retrieve the blocks from one of the
>>    underlying store drivers (same goes for Nova's use of Glance).
>>    ...and, since the glance.store drivers are dealing with blocks, I
>>    thought it made more sense in Cinder.
>>
>>
>>True, Cinder and Nova should be talking more directly to the underlying
>>stores--however their direct interface should probably be through
>>glanceclient. (Glanceclient could evolve to use the glance.store code I
>>imagine.)
>
>Hmm, that is a very interesting suggestion. glanceclient containing 
>the store drivers. I like it. Will be a bit weird, though, having the 
>glanceclient call the Glance API server to get the storage location 
>details, which then calls the glanceclient code to store/retrieve the 
>blocks :)

Exactly. This is part of the original idea. Allow Glance, nova,
glanceclient and cinder to interact with the store code.


-- 
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20131223/db408c3f/attachment.pgp>