It just depends. A VM will generally be tied to a cluster. There's technically no reason why someone couldn't make a giant cluster if your storage supports it, so on that side cluster based seems fine. But if you end up wanting to move a data disk from one VM to another, and they happen to be in different clusters, that's expensive if you don't have zone-wide storage. Usually involves dumping and reimporting, and if the same San is hosting multiple clusters it may seem silly to dump and copy back to the same San just so that the disk is associated with another cluster. On Mar 8, 2013 6:22 PM, "Mike Tutkowski" <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> Thanks for that explanation, Marcus. > > I believe the primary use case for me is to allow a cluster of hosts > (XenServer, VMware, or KVM in particular) to share access to my iSCSI > target (we would have a mapping of one VM per iSCSI target or one data disk > per iSCSI target). > > I can't really see why hosts outside of the cluster would need access to it > unless you actually are migrating the VM that's running on that volume to > another cluster. > > > On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 6:16 PM, Marcus Sorensen <shadow...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Cluster wide is good for storage that requires some sort of organization > > path the host level, for example, mounted file systems that rely on > cluster > > locking, like OCFS, GFS, cluster LVM, where hosts that aren't in a > cluster > > can't make use of the storage. Xen's SR's are sort of like this as well, > > actually almost identical to cluster LVM where it carves volumes out of a > > pool or lun, leveraging locking mechanisms in the xen cluster. Cluster > wide > > is also good for topologies that are simply laid out in a way that makes > > sense for it, for example if you had a 10g switch dedicated to a > particular > > cluster, with NFS services over it. > > > > It boils down to whether every host in the zone can access/make use of > the > > storage or whether only certain hosts can. > > On Mar 8, 2013 6:04 PM, "Mike Tutkowski" <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hey Edison, > > > > > > It is entirely possible that Zone wide for my plug-in would make sense. > > > I'm trying to understand what restrictions, if any, are in place if it > > is > > > Zone wide versus Cluster wide. > > > > > > In my case, the plug-in I'm developing will be creating an iSCSI target > > > (volume/LUN) (nothing NFS related) and if that is best to make > available > > at > > > a Zone level, that is totally fine with me. > > > > > > What would you suggest for my situation? > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Edison Su <edison...@citrix.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > That API will be easy to be added, and yes, I’ll add it next > week.**** > > > > > > > > In the last email, I just give zone-wide primary storage as an > example, > > > > and I thought your storage box will be zone-wide? As you can see, > > > > createstoragepoolcmd api is quite flexible, it can be used for > > > > zone-wide/cluster storage, so do the storage plugin.**** > > > > > > > > ** ** > > > > > > > > *From:* Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com] > > > > *Sent:* Friday, March 08, 2013 4:09 PM > > > > *To:* Edison Su > > > > *Cc:* cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > > > *Subject:* Re: Making use of a 4.2 storage plug-in from the GUI or > > > API**** > > > > > > > > ** ** > > > > > > > > OK, cool - thanks for the info, Edison.**** > > > > > > > > ** ** > > > > > > > > When you say, "One API is missing," does that mean you're still > working > > > on > > > > implementing that functionality?**** > > > > > > > > ** ** > > > > > > > > Also, it sounds like these plug-ins are associated with Zone-wide > > Primary > > > > Storage. I thought Zone-wide Primary Storage wasn't available for > all > > > > hypervisors?**** > > > > > > > > ** ** > > > > > > > > This is from a different e-mail you sent out: > > > > > > > > "Xenserver and vmware doesn’t support zone wide primary storage, > > > > currently, this feature is only for NFS/Ceph in KVM. And I think it > > > should > > > > be useful for your storage box? I am thinking per data volume per LUN > > for > > > > xenserver."**** > > > > > > > > ** ** > > > > > > > > I'm not sure how my plug-in would work with XenServer, VMware, etc. > if > > it > > > > has to be Zone-wide.**** > > > > > > > > ** ** > > > > > > > > Can you clarify this for me?**** > > > > > > > > ** ** > > > > > > > > Thanks!**** > > > > > > > > ** ** > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Edison Su <edison...@citrix.com> > > > wrote:*** > > > > * > > > > > > > > One API is missing, liststorageproviderscmd, which will list all the > > > > storage providers registered in the mgt server. **** > > > > > > > > When adding a zone wide storage pool on the UI, the UI will have a > > > > drop-down list to show all the primary storage providers. Then user > > will > > > > choose one of them, and select some other parameters for the storage > > user > > > > wants to add. At the end, UI will call, createstoragepoolcmd, with > > > > provider=the-storage-provider-uuid-returned from > liststoageprovidercmd, > > > > scope=zone, and other input parameters. Mgt server will then call > > > > corresponding storage provider based on provider uuid, to register > the > > > > storage into cloudstack.**** > > > > > > > > **** > > > > > > > > *From:* Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com] > > > > *Sent:* Friday, March 08, 2013 2:46 PM > > > > *To:* cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > > > *Cc:* Edison Su > > > > *Subject:* Making use of a 4.2 storage plug-in from the GUI or > API**** > > > > > > > > **** > > > > > > > > Hi,**** > > > > > > > > **** > > > > > > > > As you may remember, I'm leveraging Edison's new (4.2) storage > plug-in > > > > framework to build what is probably the first such plug-in for > > > CloudStack. > > > > **** > > > > > > > > **** > > > > > > > > I was wondering, does anyone know how to make the system aware of the > > > > plug-in? I believe once the plug-in is ready (i.e. usable) that the > > > intent > > > > is to be able to select it when creating Primary Storage (instead of > > > having > > > > to select a pre-existent iSCSI target).**** > > > > > > > > **** > > > > > > > > I'm curious how to get this working (i.e. select my plug-in) in the > GUI > > > > and via the API.**** > > > > > > > > **** > > > > > > > > Thanks!**** > > > > > > > > **** > > > > > > > > -- > > > > *Mike Tutkowski***** > > > > > > > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.***** > > > > > > > > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com**** > > > > > > > > o: 303.746.7302**** > > > > > > > > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud< > > > http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play> > > > > *™***** > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > **** > > > > > > > > ** ** > > > > > > > > -- > > > > *Mike Tutkowski***** > > > > > > > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.***** > > > > > > > > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com**** > > > > > > > > o: 303.746.7302**** > > > > > > > > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud< > > > http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play> > > > > *™***** > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > *Mike Tutkowski* > > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* > > > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com > > > o: 303.746.7302 > > > Advancing the way the world uses the > > > cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play> > > > *™* > > > > > > > > > -- > *Mike Tutkowski* > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com > o: 303.746.7302 > Advancing the way the world uses the > cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play> > *™* >
