Open Stack

> From: Huang Zhiteng [mailto:winston.d at gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 4:29 PM
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Cinder] Feature about volume delete
> protection
> 
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Zhangleiqiang
> <zhangleiqiang at huawei.com> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> >
> >
> > Besides the "soft-delete" state for volumes, I think there is need for
> > introducing another "fake delete" state for volumes which have snapshot.
> >
> >
> >
> > Current Openstack refuses the delete request for volumes which have
> > snapshot. However, we will have no method to limit users to only use
> > the specific snapshot other than the original volume ,  because the
> > original volume is always visible for the users.
> >
> >
> >
> > So I think we can permit users to delete volumes which have snapshots,
> > and mark the volume as "fake delete" state. When all of the snapshots
> > of the volume have already deleted, the original volume will be
> > removed automatically.
> >
> Can you describe the actual use case for this?  I not sure I follow why operator
> would like to limit the owner of the volume to only use specific version of
> snapshot.  It sounds like you are adding another layer.  If that's the case, the
> problem should be solved at upper layer instead of Cinder.

For example, one tenant's volume quota is five, and has 5 volumes and 1 snapshot already. If the data in base volume of the snapshot is corrupted, the user will need to create a new volume from the snapshot, but this operation will be failed because there are already 5 volumes, and the original volume cannot be deleted, too.

> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Any thoughts? Welcome any advices.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------
> >
> > zhangleiqiang
> >
> >
> >
> > Best Regards
> >
> >
> >
> > From: John Griffith [mailto:john.griffith at solidfire.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 8:38 PM
> >
> >
> > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Cinder] Feature about volume
> > delete protection
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 9:13 PM, John Garbutt <john at johngarbutt.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On 6 March 2014 08:50, zhangyu (AI) <zhangyu11 at huawei.com> wrote:
> >> It seems to be an interesting idea. In fact, a China-based public
> >> IaaS, QingCloud, has provided a similar feature to their virtual
> >> servers. Within 2 hours after a virtual server is deleted, the server
> >> owner can decide whether or not to cancel this deletion and re-cycle
> >> that "deleted" virtual server.
> >>
> >> People make mistakes, while such a feature helps in urgent cases. Any
> >> idea here?
> >
> > Nova has soft_delete and restore for servers. That sounds similar?
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Zhangleiqiang [mailto:zhangleiqiang at huawei.com]
> >> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 2:19 PM
> >> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> >> Subject: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Cinder] Feature about volume delete
> >> protection
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> Current openstack provide the delete volume function to the user.
> >> But it seems there is no any protection for user's delete operation miss.
> >>
> >> As we know the data in the volume maybe very important and valuable.
> >> So it's better to provide a method to the user to avoid the volume
> >> delete miss.
> >>
> >> Such as:
> >> We can provide a safe delete for the volume.
> >> User can specify how long the volume will be delay deleted(actually
> >> deleted) when he deletes the volume.
> >> Before the volume is actually deleted, user can cancel the delete
> >> operation and find back the volume.
> >> After the specified time, the volume will be actually deleted by the
> >> system.
> >>
> >> Any thoughts? Welcome any advices.
> >>
> >> Best regards to you.
> >>
> >>
> >> ----------
> >> zhangleiqiang
> >>
> >> Best Regards
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> >> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> >> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenStack-dev mailing list
> > OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >
> >
> >
> > I think a soft-delete for Cinder sounds like a neat idea.  You should
> > file a BP that we can target for Juno.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenStack-dev mailing list
> > OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Regards
> Huang Zhiteng
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev