Open Stack

option 1.


On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Renuka Apte <renuka.apte at citrix.com> wrote:

> It would be great if anyone who is already deploying Openstack, even if in
> non-production environments, could give cinder a try.****
>
> For a test environment, it seems easy enough to make the switch using
> devstack (I have verified this with XenServer, and I believe, John and
> folks at Rackspace have tried on KVM).****
>
> Of course, only when more people start trying it will we get a realistic
> picture.****
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks,****
>
> Renuka.****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Flavia Missi [mailto:flaviamissi at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 11, 2012 12:56 PM
> *To:* Renuka Apte
> *Cc:* Vishvananda Ishaya; Openstack (openstack at lists.launchpad.net) (
> openstack at lists.launchpad.net)
> *Subject:* Re: [Openstack] [nova] [cinder] Nova-volume vs. Cinder in
> Folsom****
>
> ** **
>
> For me it's +1 to 1, but...
>
> Here at Globo.com we're already deploying clouds based on openstack (not
> in production yet, we have dev and lab), and it's really painful when
> openstack just "forces" us to change, I mean, sysadmins are not that happy,
> so I think it's more polite if we warn them in Folsom, and remove
> everything next. Maybe this way nobody's going to "fear" the update. It
> also make us lose the chain of thought.. you're learning, and suddenly you
> have to change something for an update, and then you come back to what you
> we're doing...
>
> Anyway... :)
>
> Thanks,****
>
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 3:09 PM, Renuka Apte <renuka.apte at citrix.com>
> wrote:****
>
> +1 for 1****
>
>
> On 11/07/12 8:26 AM, "Vishvananda Ishaya" <vishvananda at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Hello Everyone,
> >
> >Now that the PPB has decided to promote Cinder to core for the Folsom
> >release, we need to decide what happens to the existing Nova Volume
> >code. As far as I can see it there are two basic strategies. I'm going
> >to give an overview of each here:
> >
> >Option 1 -- Remove Nova Volume
> >==============================
> >
> >Process
> >-------
> > * Remove all nova-volume code from the nova project
> > * Leave the existing nova-volume database upgrades and tables in
> >   place for Folsom to allow for migration
> > * Provide a simple script in cinder to copy data from the nova
> >   database to the cinder database (The schema for the tables in
> >   cinder are equivalent to the current nova tables)
> > * Work with package maintainers to provide a package based upgrade
> >   from nova-volume packages to cinder packages
> > * Remove the db tables immediately after Folsom
> >
> >Disadvantages
> >-------------
> > * Forces deployments to go through the process of migrating to cinder
> >   if they want to use volumes in the Folsom release
> >
> >Option 2 -- Deprecate Nova Volume
> >=================================
> >
> >Process
> >-------
> > * Mark the nova-volume code deprecated but leave it in the project
> >   for the folsom release
> > * Provide a migration path at folsom
> > * Backport bugfixes to nova-volume throughout the G-cycle
> > * Provide a second migration path at G
> > * Package maintainers can decide when to migrate to cinder
> >
> >Disadvantages
> >-------------
> > * Extra maintenance effort
> > * More confusion about storage in openstack
> > * More complicated upgrade paths need to be supported
> >
> >Personally I think Option 1 is a much more manageable strategy because
> >the volume code doesn't get a whole lot of attention. I want to keep
> >things simple and clean with one deployment strategy. My opinion is that
> >if we choose option 2 we will be sacrificing significant feature
> >development in G in order to continue to maintain nova-volume for another
> >release.
> >
> >But we really need to know if this is going to cause major pain to
> >existing
> >deployments out there. If it causes a bad experience for deployers we
> >need to take our medicine and go with option 2. Keep in mind that it
> >shouldn't make any difference to end users whether cinder or nova-volume
> >is being used. The current nova-client can use either one.
> >
> >Vish
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> >Post to     : openstack at lists.launchpad.net
> >Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> >More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> Post to     : openstack at lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp****
>
>
>
>
> --
> Flavia****
>
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> Post to     : openstack at lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>


-- 
Shake Chen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack/attachments/20120712/1a98ca94/attachment.html>