Open Stack

On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 09:29:57AM -0400, Andrew Laski wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016, at 09:06 AM, Jordan Pittier wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 8:50 AM, Zhenyu Zheng
> > <zhengzhenyulixi at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hi, all
> >>
> >> Currently we have customer demands about adding parameter
> >> "volume_type" to --block-device to provide the support of specified
> >> storage backend to boot instance. And I find one newly drafted
> >> Blueprint that aiming to address the same feature:
> >> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/support-boot-instance-set-store-type
> >> ;
> >>
> >> As I know this is kind of "proxy" feature for cinder and we don't
> >> like it in general, but as the boot from volume functional was
> >> already there, so maybe it is OK to support another parameter?
> >>
> >> So, my question is that what are your opinions about this in general?
> >> Do you like it or it will not be able to got approved at all?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Kevin Zheng
> >
> > Hi,
> > I think it's not a great idea. Not only for the reason you mention,
> > but also because the "nova boot" command is already way to complicated
> > with way to many options. IMO we should only add support for new
> > features, not "features" we can have by other means, just for
> > convenience.
> 
> I completely agree with this. However I have some memory of us
> saying(in Austin?) that adding volume_type would be acceptable since
> it's a clear oversight in the list of parameters for specifying a block
> device. So while I greatly dislike Nova creating volumes and would
> rather users pass in pre-created volume ids I would support adding this
> parameter. I do not support continuing to add parameters if Cinder adds
> parameters though.
> 

FWIW, I get asked the question on the Cinder side of how to specify
which volume type to use when booting from a Cinder volume on a fairly
regular basis.

I agree with the approach of not adding more proxy functionality in
Nova, but since this is an existing feature that is missing expected
functionality, I would like to see this get in.

Just my $0.02.

Sean

> 
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________________-
> > ________
> > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-
> > request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev