Open Stack

Forgive the ignorant question, but why is Cinder the only option for the
backing for "file system as a service" when there is also Swift?  The
blueprint that Netapp wrote up for this mentioned Swift would not be
suitable, but did not explain why.  I don't know much about the Cinder
features and limitations, but in the use case of sharing and persisting
large datasets among compute instances, it seems to me Swift would provide
the needed scalability and durability.
On Nov 21, 2012 7:13 PM, "Joe Topjian" <joe.topjian at cybera.ca> wrote:

> I don't have anything to add, I just wanted to publicly voice an agreement
> with what Blair and Michael have said.
>
> As an operator, I too see storage as storage--whether it's block or
> network shares--and should all be in one project. I'll go a step further
> and think that it should all be grouped under the concept of a "volume". A
> volume is storage - if a user wants a volume, they click create, and then
> they can choose what type they want (whether block, network, or whatever
> else the operator has enabled).
>
> IMO, please look at it from the user's point of view.
>
> (cc'ing -operators as the other posts have gone there as well and I think
> the below reply is worthwhile for those members)
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Michael Chapman <
> michael.chapman at anu.edu.au> wrote:
>
>> This is something we are extremely interested in, as we have existing
>> large filesystems (cxfs and lustre) and getting at that data in a
>> manageable and secure manner from an Openstack VM is currently a manual
>> process of sub-folder exports to floating IPs. My understanding is that
>> there are a number of research sites in similar situations.
>>
>> Following ISI's talk at the summit, one option we looked at was VirtFS,
>> but since that is KVM only and the security models available weren't going
>> to give us good results, it didn't seem like the best option.
>>
>> As to whether this belongs in Cinder or as a separate project, from an
>> ops perspective I think block storage and network shares are both instances
>> of granting individual VMs access to slices of storage resources, and as
>> such belong under a single project. If the concern is that Cinder-core will
>> require additional members that can support the additional protocols for
>> reviews, I would suggest that this is no different to supporting iser or
>> fibre-channel attached block storage, which would require a different set
>> of expertise to the current iscsi approach, yet would certainly fall under
>> the general category of block storage.
>>
>>  - Michael Chapman
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 2:52 AM, Swartzlander, Ben <
>> Ben.Swartzlander at netapp.com> wrote:
>>
>>>  NetApp is interested in providing a common way to provision and attach*
>>> ***
>>>
>>> NFS and CIFS shares to VMs in an OpenStack environment. We presented our
>>> ****
>>>
>>> ideas at the OpenStack summit last month and we have submitted a patch**
>>> **
>>>
>>> to Cinder that demonstrates one way to implement these features. We****
>>>
>>> believe that extensions to the Cinder API are the most logical and least
>>> ****
>>>
>>> disruptive way to bring these features to OpenStack, but discussions at*
>>> ***
>>>
>>> the conference show there are differences of opinion on this topic.****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> I would like to invite anyone who is interested in NFS and CIFS in****
>>>
>>> OpenStack, or Cinder or NAS in general to take a look at our etherpad***
>>> *
>>>
>>> and our code submission and provide feedback and suggestions.****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/cinder-nas-extensions****
>>>
>>> Gerrit Submission: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/16054/****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Our proposed patch does include substantial changes and we want to do***
>>> *
>>>
>>> our best to ensure that we do it right the first time, so please reply**
>>> **
>>>
>>> to me and/or this thread if you're interested and have good ideas,****
>>>
>>> opinions, or suggestions. We also welcome any code review comments on***
>>> *
>>>
>>> the gerrit submission.****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> -Ben Swartzlander****
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Michael Chapman
>> *Cloud Computing Services*
>> ANU Supercomputer Facility
>> Room 318, Leonard Huxley Building (#56), Mills Road
>> The Australian National University
>> Canberra ACT 0200 Australia
>> Tel: *+61 2 6125 7106*
>> Web: http://nci.org.au
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Joe Topjian
> Systems Administrator
> Cybera Inc.
>
> www.cybera.ca
>
> Cybera is a not-for-profit organization that works to spur and support
> innovation, for the economic benefit of Alberta, through the use
> of cyberinfrastructure.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20121121/7a3c53db/attachment.html>