Open Stack

On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 10:25 AM, Abel Lopez <alopgeek at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think this fills a gap between “enterprisy” storage backends and DIY
> backends.
> For example, a robust storage platform like NetApp or the like will have
> features like snapmirror, etc for replication, also I keep hearing that
> Ceph is getting/very-close to having cross-site replica sets. So that
> handles cinder with robust backends, but what about those using plain-old
> LVM?
> On the one hand, it sounds like a needed addition, but I’m curious if it’s
> worth the complication.
>

​FWIW, that's exactly what I'm wondering too (ROI for the complication
introduced).​

>
> I imaging, in a DR scenario, with storage-based replication, a database
> dump of cinder would be pretty much all that’s required to bring up a new
> site.
>

​Interesting...  another avenue/use case to think about.​

>
> On Jul 26, 2014, at 7:28 AM, John Griffith <john.griffith at solidfire.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hey OS-Operators,
>
> There are some features that have been kicked around and debated for a
> while now that I thought it might be great to try and solicit input from
> folks that are actually deploying and administering OpenStack.  Rather than
> leaving it up to those of us that may be in a "Vendor Vacuum" or a "Dev
> Vacuum" I thought it might be worthwhile to get some input.
>
> Cinder is getting to a point where people are proposing more advanced
> features which is great.  The problem is that those advanced features
> typically mean different things to everyone and they also open up the door
> to a whole host of implementation options.
>
> There are two features being worked on currently that I'd love to get some
> feedback on:
>
> 1. Replication
> 2. Consistency Groups
>
> It's easy for Vendors to come to me and say "we have lots of customers
> asking for this" but personally I'd love to get feedback directly from the
> actual customers, that's where you all come in.
>
> So, if any of you out there are interested in these topics from a Cinder
> perspective I'd love to hear from you.  If there's interest we can either
> start an ML thread to discuss, or perhaps a meeting to catch everybody up
> and hash things out a bit.  I'd like to discuss the current proposals and
> go through what you as Operators may feel should be priorities (or better
> yet things you don't care about).  I make no promises on the outcome of
> this little experiment but thought it would be interesting to try and get
> user input up front before we release new features.
>
> Let me know your thoughts, I'll avoid a bunch of detail in this posting
> until I get a feel for who if anybody is interested in helping out.
>
> Thanks,
> John
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140728/98051fd0/attachment.html>