I don't think a global setting is a good option because we need both
functionality to be available at the same time and for different use cases
to be able to pick which they choose.
*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer
*CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Mike Tutkowski <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> wrote:
> Now that I re-read your e-mail, it dawned on me: The end-user doesn't care
> where the snapshot is.
>
> If that's true, then we should perhaps control this via Global Settings or
> something.
>
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Mike Tutkowski <
> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>
> > It's not ideal - true, but it does allow us to be backward compatible.
> >
> > If you have other ideas, though, about how to maintain backward
> > compatibility, I'm definitely open to hear them.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Syed Mushtaq <syed1.mush...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Mike,
> >>
> >> Adding a flag to createSnapshot was the first and the most obvious thing
> >> that came to our minds. The problem that I had with this was that:
> >>
> >> 1) I feel it is exposing something to the end user that is internal to
> the
> >> cloud.
> >>
> >> 2) We have to follow two different ways of restore/deletion in the same
> >> code path depending on where the Snapshot resides which I find kind of a
> >> bad design.
> >>
> >> But if exposing a archive flag to the end user is acceptable then we can
> >> definitely use this instead of adding the StorageSnapshot API
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> -Syed
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 1:26 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> >> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi Pierre-Luc,
> >> >
> >> > My recommendation would be this:
> >> >
> >> > Add an "archive" flag to the current volume-snapshot API. Its default
> >> would
> >> > be "false" because that would be backward compatible with how 4.6 has
> >> > volume snapshots implemented (i.e. they stay on the SAN in 4.6, 4.7,
> and
> >> > 4.8).
> >> >
> >> > If you set archive=true, then we would perform a background migration
> of
> >> > the snapshot from the SAN to the secondary storage (then delete the
> SAN
> >> > snapshot).
> >> >
> >> > That archive parameter would only be valid for managed storage.
> >> >
> >> > Sound reasonable?
> >> >
> >> > Also, a VM snapshot that includes disks provided by managed storage
> >> should
> >> > work.
> >> >
> >> > Talk to you later,
> >> > Mike
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Pierre-Luc Dion <pd...@cloudops.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Mike,
> >> > >
> >> > > In terms of API's, would you prefer introducing a parameter to the
> >> > existing
> >> > > VolumeSnapshot, example: extract={true|false} with a default
> value
> >> of
> >> > > true which would extract snapshot into the secondary storage, which
> >> is
> >> > the
> >> > > current default behavior. Then for SAN snapshot that remain on the
> >> SAN we
> >> > > would just set "extract=false" ? as oppose to create a new
> >> > > StorageSnapshot API ?
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Paul,
> >> > >
> >> > > From what I'm seeing so far, we can't do a VM-snapshot when using
> >> managed
> >> > > storage for VM having more than one Volume. For the reason that
> >> snapshot
> >> > > are performed outside of the hypervisor awareness and
> asynchronously.
> >> If
> >> > > someone have a way to address that, it would make thinks much more
> >> > > attractive.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Ian Rae <i...@cloudops.com> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > I think a service provider backup scenario is more likely to take
> >> > > advantage
> >> > > > of SAN snapshot. There are a few reasons for this. Traditional
> >> backups
> >> > > > involve access to the file system, and there is an expectation
> that
> >> > this
> >> > > > can be done with reasonably short time frames without negatively
> >> > > impacting
> >> > > > VM performance, and that the backup orchestrator can apply various
> >> > logic
> >> > > > and or transformations to the data (compress, encrypt, deltas
> >> etc...).
> >> > > > While it is true that one could apply a backup process to a cloud
> >> > > snapshot,
> >> > > > this would be slow and inefficient requiring the data to be moved
> >> > several
> >> > > > times and there are some major bottlenecks with cloud snapshots.
> >> With a
> >> > > > cloud snapshot - there seems to be no reasonable expectation of
> >> being
> >> > > able
> >> > > > to do differential snapshots (I think this depends on the
> >> hypervisor)
> >> > and
> >> > > > if you do differential snapshots this will make file backups from
> >> those
> >> > > > snapshots even more complicated to orchestrate.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Suspect there needs to be a different thread on how to better
> enable
> >> > > > backups, as a service. As per Paul's suggestion, but it is a
> related
> >> > > > workflow so relevant to this discussion.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Ian
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Monday, February 8, 2016, Mike Tutkowski <
> >> > > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com>
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > To me it sounds like number two and number three are different
> >> uses
> >> > for
> >> > > > the
> >> > > > > same "thing"(which is totally fine).
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > As for taking a fast SAN snapshot and exporting it
> >> asynchronously, do
> >> > > we
> >> > > > > see the SSVM as performing the export?
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > To be backwards compatible with what we have in 4.6 and later
> for
> >> > > volume
> >> > > > > snapshots for managed storage, I think it might be easier if we
> >> pass
> >> > > in a
> >> > > > > flag that says whether or not to archive the SAN snapshot
> (which,
> >> I
> >> > > > think,
> >> > > > > is something that you suggested, as well, Pierre-Luc).
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > On Monday, February 8, 2016, Pierre-Luc Dion <
> pd...@cloudops.com
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > Hi Mike,
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > The reason behind the creation of a SAN snapshot which is
> >> exported
> >> > > into
> >> > > > > > secondary storage, is because creating a copy of the .VHD
> >> directly
> >> > > > would
> >> > > > > > impact uptime of the VM as creating that copy take lots of
> time.
> >> > Has
> >> > > > > oppose
> >> > > > > > to a SAN snapshot that is close to instantaneous which can
> >> > afterward
> >> > > be
> >> > > > > > clone into Secondary Storage asynchronously.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > I would suspect an extracted VolumeSnapshot taken from a SAN
> >> > snapshot
> >> > > > > could
> >> > > > > > have is SAN snapshot deleted to avoid duplica and space
> >> consumption
> >> > > on
> >> > > > > the
> >> > > > > > Primary Storage side.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > I see 3 definitions in our current discussion regarding the
> term
> >> > > > snapshot
> >> > > > > > (these are not official terminology but by own interpretation
> of
> >> > > them):
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > 1. *Snapshot* (AKA: Storage Snapshot / Mike's definition of a
> >> > > > snapshot):
> >> > > > > > it's a volume snapshot at the storage level, point in time of
> >> your
> >> > > > data.
> >> > > > > it
> >> > > > > > reside on the primary storage. Useful and efficient for
> software
> >> > side
> >> > > > > > incident.
> >> > > > > > 2. *Cloud Snapshot *( AKA: CloudStack VolumeSnapshot/ cloud
> >> backup
> >> > > > aws-S3
> >> > > > > > style ): Point in time copy of the Virtual Disk that reside
> on a
> >> > > > > different
> >> > > > > > storage array then the original Volume. Facilitate data
> >> migration
> >> > > > between
> >> > > > > > clusters and, in case of primary storage incident, Volume
> >> snapshots
> >> > > are
> >> > > > > not
> >> > > > > > impacted and can be reuse.
> >> > > > > > 3. *Backup*: Archival of your Virtual-machines data that also
> >> > > validate
> >> > > > > data
> >> > > > > > integrity, provide a storage efficient archiving method and an
> >> > > > > independent
> >> > > > > > way to restore your data in case of an major infrastructure
> >> > disaster.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Regards,
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > PL
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> >> > > > > > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com <javascript:;> <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > So, let's see if I currently follow the requirements:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > * Augment volume snapshots for managed storage to
> >> conditionally
> >> > > > export
> >> > > > > > data
> >> > > > > > > to NFS. The current process of taking a snapshot on the SAN
> is
> >> > > fine,
> >> > > > > but
> >> > > > > > > we'd like the option to export the data to NFS, as well.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Questions:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Once the data has been exported to NFS, do we keep the SAN
> >> > snapshot
> >> > > > or
> >> > > > > > > delete it?
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > If we are deleting the SAN snapshot, then why don't we just
> >> copy
> >> > > the
> >> > > > > VHD
> >> > > > > > > from primary to secondary the way we do today for
> non-managed
> >> > (i.e.
> >> > > > > > > traditional) storage? Why create a SAN snapshot in that
> >> scenario?
> >> > > > > Perhaps
> >> > > > > > > to have the SSVM mount and perform the VHD copy to secondary
> >> > > storage
> >> > > > > > > instead of a XenServer host?
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Thanks for the clarification.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > By the way, to me a backup is when you copy data from one
> >> storage
> >> > > > > system
> >> > > > > > to
> >> > > > > > > another (regardless of features, if any, to restore the data
> >> in
> >> > the
> >> > > > > > > future). A snapshot is a point-in-time view of the data of a
> >> > volume
> >> > > > and
> >> > > > > > > it's stored on the same storage system as the volume.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Pierre-Luc Dion <
> >> > > pd...@cloudops.com
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > > <javascript:;>>
> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > That's fun to see that discussion happening. I 100% agree
> >> with
> >> > > > Paul's
> >> > > > > > > > points of view. VolumeSnapshot are not a backup, but I do
> >> > > consider
> >> > > > > them
> >> > > > > > > as
> >> > > > > > > > a safety vest against Primary Storage failure, because
> >> failure
> >> > > > append
> >> > > > > > > :-( .
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > The current proposal around snapshots that reside on the
> >> > primary
> >> > > > > > storage
> >> > > > > > > or
> >> > > > > > > > snapshots that end in the Secondary Storage is not to
> >> address
> >> > > any
> >> > > > > kind
> >> > > > > > > of
> >> > > > > > > > backups requirement because a snapshot is not a backup,
> >> event
> >> > an
> >> > > > > > > extracted
> >> > > > > > > > VM snapshot.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > The main idea, and again this is for managed storage;
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > 1. StorageSnapshotAPI: Provide storage side snapshot
> >> capability
> >> > > for
> >> > > > > > fast
> >> > > > > > > > response time that support rollback to previous timestamp,
> >> > create
> >> > > > new
> >> > > > > > > > volume and maybe create template.
> >> > > > > > > > not required to be a new API if the work is already
> >> done, I
> >> > > > think
> >> > > > > > > this
> >> > > > > > > > is a different behaviors than the user expectation of a
> >> > > > > > volume-snapshot.
> >> > > > > > > > 2. VolumeSnapshotAPI: Provide current cloudstack behavior
> >> that
> >> > > > create
> >> > > > > > an
> >> > > > > > > > extraction of a volume into SecondaryStorage which can be
> >> reuse
> >> > > to
> >> > > > > > > create a
> >> > > > > > > > new volume into another Primary Storage. This type of
> >> snapshot
> >> > > is a
> >> > > > > > slow
> >> > > > > > > > job since yes it would have to copy the full volume size
> on
> >> the
> >> > > > > > Secondary
> >> > > > > > > > storage.
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > PL
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Syed Mushtaq <
> >> > > > > syed1.mush...@gmail.com <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > > <javascript:;>>
> >> > > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > I think I share you view on the 'Ideal world'. Backup
> (via
> >> > > Volume
> >> > > > > > > > > Snapshots) is a huge bottleneck in Cloudstack. This is
> >> > > amplified
> >> > > > > > > > especially
> >> > > > > > > > > when you have a object storage as your secondary storage
> >> > > because
> >> > > > it
> >> > > > > > > > > requires two copies (one to an NFS staging area and from
> >> > there
> >> > > to
> >> > > > > > > object
> >> > > > > > > > > storage). And not to mention that all these copies are
> >> > > consuming
> >> > > > > > > > hypervisor
> >> > > > > > > > > resources. Xenserver's Dom0 is also a huge bottleneck as
> >> all
> >> > > the
> >> > > > > > > Network
> >> > > > > > > > > and I/O flow through it. So our intention of proposing
> the
> >> > > > "Storage
> >> > > > > > > > > Snapshots" is to give a better way of achiving snapshots
> >> > while
> >> > > > > still
> >> > > > > > > > > keeping the original definition of volume snpashots (ie
> >> > upload
> >> > > to
> >> > > > > sec
> >> > > > > > > > > storage).
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > But as Erik pointed out volume snapshots are not
> backups.
> >> > They
> >> > > > > don't
> >> > > > > > > work
> >> > > > > > > > > form multi-disk LVM volume groups and dynamic disks. I
> am
> >> all
> >> > > in
> >> > > > > for
> >> > > > > > a
> >> > > > > > > > > better backup solution which handles these use cases and
> >> > > utilizes
> >> > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > storage's advanced features.
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Paul Angus <
> >> > > > > > paul.an...@shapeblue.com <javascript:;> <javascript:;>>
> >> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > In the beginning... there were CloudStack snapshots
> and
> >> > they
> >> > > > were
> >> > > > > > > > > actually
> >> > > > > > > > > > volume snapshots not hypervisor point-in-time
> snapshots.
> >> > > > > > > > > > Then VM snapshots were created (which are
> point-in-time
> >> > > > > hypervisor
> >> > > > > > > > > > snapshots) and we started referring to the original
> >> > snapshots
> >> > > > as
> >> > > > > > > volume
> >> > > > > > > > > > snapshots.
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > CloudStack does not offer 'backups', but many people
> use
> >> > > volume
> >> > > > > > > > snapshots
> >> > > > > > > > > > as backups. However you can't in-place restore volume
> >> > > snapshots
> >> > > > > and
> >> > > > > > > if
> >> > > > > > > > > you
> >> > > > > > > > > > have a VM with multiple volumes, the volume snapshots
> >> must
> >> > be
> >> > > > > done
> >> > > > > > in
> >> > > > > > > > > > series, meaning that the state across all of the
> >> volumes is
> >> > > > > > unlikely
> >> > > > > > > to
> >> > > > > > > > > be
> >> > > > > > > > > > consistent.
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > 'Actual Backups' would enable all of the restore
> options
> >> > > which
> >> > > > > > users
> >> > > > > > > > > might
> >> > > > > > > > > > expect as well options as to where they might be
> >> stored. In
> >> > > my
> >> > > > > > ideal
> >> > > > > > > > > world
> >> > > > > > > > > > they would also be able to leverage back-end hardware
> >> (such
> >> > > as
> >> > > > > > > > Solidfire,
> >> > > > > > > > > > NetApp etc :) ) and software such as Veeam, Commvault
> >> etc
> >> > to
> >> > > > > > > accelerate
> >> > > > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > process.
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > [image: ShapeBlue] <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> >> > > > > > > > > > Paul Angus
> >> > > > > > > > > > VP Technology , ShapeBlue
> >> > > > > > > > > > d: *+44 203 617 0528 | s: +44 203 603 0540*
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > <+44%20203%20617%200528%20%7C%20s:%20+44%20203%20603%200540> |
> >> > > > > m:
> >> > > > > > > > > > *+44 7711 418784* <+44%207711%20418784>
> >> > > > > > > > > > e: *paul.an...@shapeblue.com <javascript:;>
> >> > <javascript:;>
> >> > > |
> >> > > > > t: @cloudyangus*
> >> > > > > > > > > > <paul.an...@shapeblue.com <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>%20%7C%20t:%20@cloudyangus>
> >> > > > > > | w:
> >> > > > > > > > > > *www.shapeblue.com* <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> >> > > > > > > > > > a: 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London WC2N 4HS UK
> >> > > > > > > > > > Shape Blue Ltd is a company incorporated in England &
> >> > Wales.
> >> > > > > > > ShapeBlue
> >> > > > > > > > > > Services India LLP is a company incorporated in India
> >> and
> >> > is
> >> > > > > > operated
> >> > > > > > > > > under
> >> > > > > > > > > > license from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil
> >> Consultoria
> >> > > Ltda
> >> > > > > is
> >> > > > > > a
> >> > > > > > > > > > company incorporated in Brasil and is operated under
> >> > license
> >> > > > from
> >> > > > > > > Shape
> >> > > > > > > > > > Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company registered
> >> by
> >> > The
> >> > > > > > > Republic
> >> > > > > > > > of
> >> > > > > > > > > > South Africa and is traded under license from Shape
> Blue
> >> > Ltd.
> >> > > > > > > ShapeBlue
> >> > > > > > > > > is
> >> > > > > > > > > > a registered trademark.
> >> > > > > > > > > > This email and any attachments to it may be
> confidential
> >> > and
> >> > > > are
> >> > > > > > > > intended
> >> > > > > > > > > > solely for the use of the individual to whom it is
> >> > addressed.
> >> > > > Any
> >> > > > > > > views
> >> > > > > > > > > or
> >> > > > > > > > > > opinions expressed are solely those of the author and
> do
> >> > not
> >> > > > > > > > necessarily
> >> > > > > > > > > > represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related
> companies.
> >> If
> >> > > you
> >> > > > > are
> >> > > > > > > not
> >> > > > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > intended recipient of this email, you must neither
> take
> >> any
> >> > > > > action
> >> > > > > > > > based
> >> > > > > > > > > > upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone.
> Please
> >> > > > contact
> >> > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > sender
> >> > > > > > > > > > if you believe you have received this email in error.
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> >> > > > > > > > > > From: Syed Mushtaq [mailto:syed1.mush...@gmail.com
> >> > > > > <javascript:;> <javascript:;>]
> >> > > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, February 5, 2016 4:58 PM
> >> > > > > > > > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org <javascript:;>
> >> > <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Propose][New Feature] Storage Snapshots
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > Paul,
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > When you say actual backups, how would it be different
> >> from
> >> > > the
> >> > > > > > > Volume
> >> > > > > > > > > > Snapshots that exist currently. My understanding is
> that
> >> > > > Backups
> >> > > > > > end
> >> > > > > > > up
> >> > > > > > > > > in
> >> > > > > > > > > > Sec Storage whereas Snapshots are just a point-in-time
> >> > state
> >> > > of
> >> > > > > > your
> >> > > > > > > > > volume
> >> > > > > > > > > > which can be restored back correct?
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > -Syed
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 11:23 AM, Paul Angus <
> >> > > > > > > paul.an...@shapeblue.com <javascript:;> <javascript:;>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Hi Syed,
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > As I understand it, the SolidFire plugin will export
> >> the
> >> > > > > snapshot
> >> > > > > > > to
> >> > > > > > > > > > > secondary storage if the user requests a template
> from
> >> > the
> >> > > > > > snapshot
> >> > > > > > > > or
> >> > > > > > > > > > > wants to download the snapshot from the cloud. This
> >> is a
> >> > > > good,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > pragmatic approach and yes Mike the SolidFire
> storage
> >> is
> >> > > > super
> >> > > > > > > > > > > reliable and snapshots on SolidFire arrays take up
> >> next
> >> > to
> >> > > no
> >> > > > > > > space.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > BUT I think that we are talking about a more general
> >> > > purpose
> >> > > > > API,
> >> > > > > > > and
> >> > > > > > > > > > > other storage systems may not be as awesome as
> Mike's.
> >> > > That's
> >> > > > > my
> >> > > > > > > > > > > concern. Also, the time to transfer for say 1TB to
> >> move
> >> > > from
> >> > > > > > > primary
> >> > > > > > > > > > > to sec storage and then create a VM template out of
> it
> >> > may
> >> > > be
> >> > > > > too
> >> > > > > > > > long
> >> > > > > > > > > > for users.
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > @Mike I don’t think 'we' use the term volume
> snapshot
> >> for
> >> > > > > backup,
> >> > > > > > > > it's
> >> > > > > > > > > > > just that users want to do backups and a volume
> >> snapshot
> >> > is
> >> > > > the
> >> > > > > > > only
> >> > > > > > > > > > > type of snapshot that copies the disk elsewhere and
> >> can
> >> > be
> >> > > > > > > scheduled.
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > I'm 'pondering' the implications of enabling actual
> >> > backups
> >> > > > > > > (through
> >> > > > > > > > > > > recognised backup providers) and the user
> requirements
> >> > > around
> >> > > > > > them
> >> > > > > > > > > > > (particularly restoration use cases) as a separate
> >> thread
> >> > > of
> >> > > > > > work.
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > [image: ShapeBlue] <http://www.shapeblue.com> Paul
> >> Angus
> >> > > VP
> >> > > > > > > > Technology
> >> > > > > > > > > > > , ShapeBlue
> >> > > > > > > > > > > d: *+44 203 617 0528 | s: +44 203 603 0540*
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > <+44%20203%20617%200528%20%7C%20s:%20+44%20203%20603%200540>
> >> > > > |
> >> > > > > m:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > *+44 7711 418784* <+44%207711%20418784>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > e: *paul.an...@shapeblue.com <javascript:;>
> >> > > <javascript:;> |
> >> > > > > t: @cloudyangus*
> >> > > > > > > > > > > <paul.an...@shapeblue.com <javascript:;>
> >> <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > > %20%7C%20t:%20@cloudyangus> | w:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > *www.shapeblue.com* <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > a: 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London WC2N 4HS
> UK
> >> > Shape
> >> > > > > Blue
> >> > > > > > > Ltd
> >> > > > > > > > > > > is a company incorporated in England & Wales.
> >> ShapeBlue
> >> > > > > Services
> >> > > > > > > > India
> >> > > > > > > > > > > LLP is a company incorporated in India and is
> operated
> >> > > under
> >> > > > > > > license
> >> > > > > > > > > > > from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria
> >> Ltda
> >> > is
> >> > > a
> >> > > > > > > company
> >> > > > > > > > > > > incorporated in Brasil and is operated under license
> >> from
> >> > > > Shape
> >> > > > > > > Blue
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company registered by
> >> The
> >> > > > > Republic
> >> > > > > > > of
> >> > > > > > > > > > > South Africa and is traded under license from Shape
> >> Blue
> >> > > Ltd.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > This email and any attachments to it may be
> >> confidential
> >> > > and
> >> > > > > are
> >> > > > > > > > > > > intended solely for the use of the individual to
> whom
> >> it
> >> > is
> >> > > > > > > > addressed.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of
> >> the
> >> > > > author
> >> > > > > > and
> >> > > > > > > do
> >> > > > > > > > > > > not necessarily represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or
> >> > > related
> >> > > > > > > > > > > companies. If you are not the intended recipient of
> >> this
> >> > > > email,
> >> > > > > > you
> >> > > > > > > > > > > must neither take any action based upon its
> contents,
> >> nor
> >> > > > copy
> >> > > > > or
> >> > > > > > > > show
> >> > > > > > > > > > > it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you
> believe
> >> > you
> >> > > > have
> >> > > > > > > > > received
> >> > > > > > > > > > this email in error.
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> >> > > > > > > > > > > From: Syed Mushtaq [mailto:syed1.mush...@gmail.com
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > > <javascript:;>]
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Sent: 05 February 2016 15:31
> >> > > > > > > > > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org <javascript:;>
> >> > > <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Propose][New Feature] Storage
> Snapshots
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > I think the terminology confusion comes from AWS
> where
> >> > they
> >> > > > do
> >> > > > > > EBS
> >> > > > > > > > > > > snapshots backed up to S3 and CloudStack sort of
> >> followed
> >> > > > that.
> >> > > > > > And
> >> > > > > > > > as
> >> > > > > > > > > > > an end user who is oblivious to the internals of my
> >> > > provider,
> >> > > > > my
> >> > > > > > > > > > > expectation would be something similar to what AWS
> as
> >> > that
> >> > > is
> >> > > > > my
> >> > > > > > > > > > > biggest reference point.
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > To your point Mike, I agree that a Primary Storage
> >> > failure
> >> > > on
> >> > > > > > > > > > > SolidFire is unlikely, there are other motivations
> >> for us
> >> > > to
> >> > > > > push
> >> > > > > > > > data
> >> > > > > > > > > > > to secondary storage. Primary storage (atleast for
> us)
> >> > > costs
> >> > > > > > > around 3
> >> > > > > > > > > > > times as much as secondary storage and snapshots on
> >> > primary
> >> > > > > > storage
> >> > > > > > > > > > > are rarely used (especially for some of our
> customers
> >> who
> >> > > do
> >> > > > > > daily
> >> > > > > > > > > > backups).
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 10:18 AM, Mike Tutkowski <
> >> > > > > > > > > > > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com <javascript:;>
> >> > > <javascript:;>>
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > Some of the weirdness is around terminology.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > For most systems I've worked on, a snapshot and a
> >> > backup
> >> > > > are
> >> > > > > > two
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > completely different things (but CloudStack has
> >> > > > traditionally
> >> > > > > > > used
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > the term "volume snapshot" to mean backup).
> >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > I will put in a SolidFire "plug" here and say,
> >> though,
> >> > > that
> >> > > > > if
> >> > > > > > > your
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > primary storage is running on SolidFire that it is
> >> > > unlikely
> >> > > > > > > you'll
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > encounter an issue where your primary storage goes
> >> > > offline
> >> > > > > (and
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > you'll even maintain your performance guarantees
> >> during
> >> > > > > failure
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > scenarios and upgrades, as well). That being the
> >> case,
> >> > it
> >> > > > is
> >> > > > > > less
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > useful to require a backup to Swift (but it's
> >> perfectly
> >> > > OK
> >> > > > if
> >> > > > > > > > that's
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > what we want to do
> >> > > > > > > > > > > here).
> >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Syed Mushtaq
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > <syed1.mush...@gmail.com <javascript:;>
> >> > <javascript:;>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Paul,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe with the current implementation of
> >> > Snapshots
> >> > > on
> >> > > > > > > managed
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > storage
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > (SolidFire) the snapshots are never exported to
> >> the
> >> > > > > secondary
> >> > > > > > > > > > storage.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > While this solves the problem of having
> snapshots
> >> > > taking
> >> > > > > > > forever
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > to get to sec storage, this leaves us with a
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > huge
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > liability if our primary storage goes down. We
> see
> >> > > > > snapshots
> >> > > > > > as
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > our recovery path because we store them in Swift
> >> > which
> >> > > is
> >> > > > > > > > reliable
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > and resilient to failures.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > With Storage snpashots our goal is to have
> Volume
> >> > > > snapshots
> >> > > > > > > > always
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > backed up to secondary storage and Storage
> >> Snapshots
> >> > > stay
> >> > > > > on
> >> > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > primary
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > storage.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > A provider could potentially mix both these and
> >> solve
> >> > > the
> >> > > > > > > problem
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > that you mentioned where you want to meet user's
> >> > > > > expectation
> >> > > > > > > of a
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > snapshot (ie backup to sec storage) while having
> >> an
> >> > > > ability
> >> > > > > > to
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > utilize faster sanpshots (i.e. on the device)
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hope this clarifies things.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -Syed
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Paul Angus
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > <paul.an...@shapeblue.com <javascript:;>
> >> > > <javascript:;>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > HI guys,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Could someone point me to the Jira bug of FS
> for
> >> > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > SAN-snapshot
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > feature
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > in 4.6 which is mentioned.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > From my discussions with users and operators
> >> around
> >> > > > > > snapshots
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd make
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > following observations:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > a. 'users' use snapshots as backups (both
> >> long-term
> >> > > and
> >> > > > > > short
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > term)
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > with
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > the expectation that they can use them for
> >> recovery
> >> > > if
> >> > > > > > > > required.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > b. operators fall back to snapshots if
> something
> >> > has
> >> > > > gone
> >> > > > > > > wrong
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > with primary storage.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > c. users sometimes want to be able to export
> >> > > snapshots
> >> > > > as
> >> > > > > > > well
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > as
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > create
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > new VMs from their snapshots
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > d. snapshots are a currently a massive pain
> for
> >> > > > > operators,
> >> > > > > > I
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > know at
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > least
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > one public cloud who have snapshots which
> take 2
> >> > days
> >> > > > to
> >> > > > > > > > > complete.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > e. snapshots (as they are) can't be used for
> >> > multiple
> >> > > > LVM
> >> > > > > > > > disks.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the process Mike has used in the
> >> SolidFire
> >> > > > plugin
> >> > > > > > > (only
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > moving
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > disk image to secondary storage when you
> >> absolutely
> >> > > > have
> >> > > > > > to)
> >> > > > > > > is
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > a very
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > good
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > and pragmatic solution. I wonder what problems
> >> an
> >> > > > > operator
> >> > > > > > > > might
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > experience
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > if they have an issue with a given primary
> >> storage
> >> > > pool
> >> > > > > in
> >> > > > > > a
> >> > > > > > > > > > cluster.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > (I
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > know that that is REALLY unlikely in the
> >> SolidFire
> >> > > case
> >> > > > > > Mike
> >> > > > > > > :)
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ) And
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > if
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > the transfer from primary to secondary is
> slow,
> >> the
> >> > > > time
> >> > > > > to
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > being able
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > to
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > create a template or export the volume will be
> >> > slow.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > So for me the issue is around making sure that
> >> the
> >> > > end
> >> > > > > > users
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > expectations
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > are met (while improving the speed/efficiency
> of
> >> > the
> >> > > > back
> >> > > > > > > end)
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > [image: ShapeBlue] <http://www.shapeblue.com>
> >> Paul
> >> > > > Angus
> >> > > > > > VP
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Technology , ShapeBlue
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > d: *+44 203 617 0528 | s: +44 203 603 0540*
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > <+44%20203%20617%200528%20%7C%20s:%20+44%20203%20603%200540>
> >> > > > > > > |
> >> > > > > > > > m:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > *+44 7711 418784* <+44%207711%20418784>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > e: *paul.an...@shapeblue.com <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;> | t:
> >> > > > > > @cloudyangus*
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <paul.an...@shapeblue.com <javascript:;>
> >> > > > <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > > %20%7C%20t:%20@cloudyangus> | w:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > *www.shapeblue.com* <http://www.shapeblue.com
> >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > a: 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden London WC2N
> >> 4HS
> >> > UK
> >> > > > > Shape
> >> > > > > > > > Blue
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ltd is a company incorporated in England &
> >> Wales.
> >> > > > > ShapeBlue
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Services India LLP is a company incorporated
> in
> >> > India
> >> > > > and
> >> > > > > > is
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > operated
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > under
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > license from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil
> >> > > > > Consultoria
> >> > > > > > > Ltda
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > is a company incorporated in Brasil and is
> >> operated
> >> > > > under
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty
> >> Ltd
> >> > is
> >> > > a
> >> > > > > > > company
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > registered by The Republic
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > of
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > South Africa and is traded under license from
> >> Shape
> >> > > > Blue
> >> > > > > > Ltd.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > ShapeBlue
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > is
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > a registered trademark.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > This email and any attachments to it may be
> >> > > > confidential
> >> > > > > > and
> >> > > > > > > > are
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > intended
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > solely for the use of the individual to whom
> it
> >> is
> >> > > > > > addressed.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any views
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > or
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > opinions expressed are solely those of the
> >> author
> >> > and
> >> > > > do
> >> > > > > > not
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > necessarily
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related
> >> > > companies.
> >> > > > > If
> >> > > > > > > you
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > are not
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > intended recipient of this email, you must
> >> neither
> >> > > take
> >> > > > > any
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > action
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > based
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > upon its contents, nor copy or show it to
> >> anyone.
> >> > > > Please
> >> > > > > > > > contact
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > sender
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > if you believe you have received this email in
> >> > error.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Pierre-Luc Dion [mailto:
> >> pd...@cloudops.com
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > > <javascript:;>]
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, February 5, 2016 12:56 PM
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Propose][New Feature] Storage
> >> > Snapshots
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Mike,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > The idea of introducing a new API:
> >> StorageSnapshot
> >> > > for
> >> > > > > > > managed
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > storage
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > is
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > because the VolumeSnapshot default, or
> expected,
> >> > > > behavior
> >> > > > > > is
> >> > > > > > > to
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > archive snapshots into the Secondary Storage.
> >> So a
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > StorageSnapshot API would be
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > for
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > snapshot that remain on the managed storage
> >> > > appliance.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quickly looking at the API doc and I don't
> see a
> >> > > strong
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > requirement for volume snapshots to be moved
> >> into
> >> > > > > secondary
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > storage. So, maybe StorageSnapshot API is not
> >> > useful,
> >> > > > but
> >> > > > > > > both
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > use cases are required. A snapshot that remain
> >> on
> >> > the
> >> > > > > > managed
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > storage, and another type of
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > snapshot
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > that end up into the secondary storage. Since
> >> > you've
> >> > > > > done a
> >> > > > > > > lot
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > of
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > work,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > might easier to just add a parameter to the
> >> current
> >> > > > > > snapshot
> >> > > > > > > > API
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > that
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > would
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > trigger an extraction of the storage snapshot
> >> into
> >> > > the
> >> > > > > > > > secondary
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > storage?
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > PL
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 9:02 PM, Mike
> Tutkowski <
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think that all sounds reasonable then -
> >> thanks!
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 6:52 PM, Syed
> Mushtaq <
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > syed1.mush...@gmail.com <javascript:;>
> >> <javascript:;>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> You are correct Mike in terms of the
> >> > requirements.
> >> > > > One
> >> > > > > > of
> >> > > > > > > > our
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > earlier
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> iterations on this was to have an argument
> to
> >> > the
> >> > > > > create
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> snapshot
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > API
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> which decides whether to backup the volume
> to
> >> > sec
> >> > > > > > storage
> >> > > > > > > > but
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> we realized it would make management of
> >> > snapshots
> >> > > > > quite
> >> > > > > > > > messy
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> so we proposed a new api instead.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016, 8:29 PM Mike Tutkowski
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Hi,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Just to make sure I understand all the
> >> > > requirements
> >> > > > > > here:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> 1) This relates only to managed storage
> (1:1
> >> > > > mapping
> >> > > > > > > > between
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> a virtual disk and a backend SAN volume).
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> 2) We want to take the current (introduced
> >> in
> >> > > 4.6)
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> functionality, which creates a snapshot on
> >> the
> >> > > SAN,
> >> > > > > and
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> extend it via a config option (or
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> something) to not only take the SAN
> >> snapshot,
> >> > but
> >> > > > to
> >> > > > > > copy
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> the underlying VHD (XenServer only) to
> NFS.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> 3) The SAN snapshot is always taken. It's
> >> the
> >> > > > backup
> >> > > > > to
> >> > > > > > > NFS
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> that is optional.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> 4) Templates can be created from the
> >> snapshot
> >> > > > that's
> >> > > > > on
> >> > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> SAN (already works).
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> 5) CloudStack volumes can be created from
> >> the
> >> > > > > snapshot
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> that's on
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> SAN (already works as long as the new
> >> > CloudStack
> >> > > > > volume
> >> > > > > > > > ends
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> up on the same primary storage).
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Would we have a need for a storage
> snapshot
> >> API
> >> > > > then
> >> > > > > or
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> would that just be the standard volume
> >> snapshot
> >> > > > > without
> >> > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> backup to
> >> > > > > > > > > > > NFS?
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Thanks!
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Mike
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Syed
> Mushtaq
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> <syed1.mush...@gmail.com <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> Is it possible to have both
> functionalities
> >> > > > > (snapshot
> >> > > > > > on
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> SAN & Sec
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> Storage) coexist? Because Ideally, we
> would
> >> > like
> >> > > > to
> >> > > > > > have
> >> > > > > > > > > both.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> For example, some of our customers want
> to
> >> > > > implement
> >> > > > > > > their
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> own backup strategies and do encryption
> to
> >> > their
> >> > > > > > backups
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> which is a perfect use case for Storage
> >> > Snapshot
> >> > > > > while
> >> > > > > > > our
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> other customers will still keep using the
> >> > > standard
> >> > > > > > > volume
> >> > > > > > > > > > > snapshot.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> To keep things backward compatible, we
> can
> >> > add a
> >> > > > > > setting
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> which
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > says
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> to not upload on secondary storage,
> >> because,
> >> > > after
> >> > > > > > all,
> >> > > > > > > > you
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> would take a SAN snapshot first when
> doing
> >> a
> >> > > > Volume
> >> > > > > > > > > Snapshot.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> You could stop the process there and not
> do
> >> > the
> >> > > > > > upload.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> What do you think about this approach?
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> Thanks,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> -Syed
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Mike
> >> > Tutkowski <
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> >> <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> So, this is just me thinking out load
> >> here,
> >> > but
> >> > > > if
> >> > > > > a
> >> > > > > > > > given
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> CloudStack cloud doesn't actually need
> to
> >> > > provide
> >> > > > > > both
> >> > > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > ability
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> to take a SAN snapshot and export it to
> >> NFS
> >> > (if
> >> > > > > just
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> taking a SAN snapshot is OK), then we
> >> might
> >> > be
> >> > > > able
> >> > > > > > to
> >> > > > > > > > get
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> away with no new
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > API
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> calls and simply implement a new custom
> >> > > snapshot
> >> > > > > > > strategy
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> and
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > data
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> motion strategy to handle the case where
> >> the
> >> > > > > > CloudStack
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> cloud
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > does
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> want both a SAN snapshot and
> >> exported-to-NFS
> >> > > > > backup.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> In other words, the "default" behavior
> >> would
> >> > be
> >> > > > to
> >> > > > > > use
> >> > > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> snapshot strategy and data motion
> strategy
> >> > that
> >> > > > we
> >> > > > > > > > already
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> have (the one that only takes a SAN
> >> > snapshot).
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> If your CloudStack cloud, however, wants
> >> to
> >> > > take
> >> > > > a
> >> > > > > > SAN
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> snapshot and have the data exported to
> >> NFS,
> >> > > then
> >> > > > we
> >> > > > > > > could
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> have you manipulate a Swing config file
> to
> >> > make
> >> > > > use
> >> > > > > > of
> >> > > > > > > a
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> new snapshot strategy and data motion
> >> > strategy
> >> > > > that
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> performs both of these
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > activities.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> This way, the old behavior is still the
> >> > default
> >> > > > for
> >> > > > > > > > users,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> but CloudStack admins can change this
> >> > behavior
> >> > > > via
> >> > > > > > > > > > > configuration.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> Thoughts?
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 11:55 AM, Mike
> >> > > Tutkowski <
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> >> <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Right...I think we will need to come up
> >> > with a
> >> > > > > > viable
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> upgrade path or some reasonable way for
> >> them
> >> > > to
> >> > > > > move
> >> > > > > > > > from
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> the old way to the new way (and some
> >> obvious
> >> > > way
> >> > > > > > that
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> they will know they need
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > to
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > do this).
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 11:45 AM, Syed
> >> > Mushtaq
> >> > > <
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> syed1.mush...@gmail.com <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> I'm not really sure about the upgrade
> >> path
> >> > > > > however,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> customers who are using 4.6 and are
> on a
> >> > > > managed
> >> > > > > > > > storage
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> would no longer have the same
> >> functionality
> >> > > > with
> >> > > > > > > Volume
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Snapshots.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 1:43 PM, Syed
> >> > Mushtaq
> >> > > <
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> syed1.mush...@gmail.com
> <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> So if I understand correctly,
> currently
> >> > > > taking a
> >> > > > > > > > Volume
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> Snapshots of a volume on a managed
> >> storage
> >> > > > keeps
> >> > > > > > it
> >> > > > > > > on
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> the storage array. As a part of this
> >> > > feature,
> >> > > > we
> >> > > > > > can
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> make sure
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > that
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> Volume Snapshots on managed storage
> are
> >> > > > uploaded
> >> > > > > > to
> >> > > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> secondary storage. This would make
> the
> >> > > Volume
> >> > > > > > > Snapshot
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> feature behave the same regardless of
> >> the
> >> > > > > storage
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> (managed or
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> non-managed) And, for utilizing the
> >> > > efficient
> >> > > > > > > backend
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> storage
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > capabilities, we can use the new storage
> >> snapshots
> >> > > API.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 1:36 PM, Mike
> >> > > > Tutkowski <
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> >> > <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>>
> >> > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Whatever we do here, we need to
> have a
> >> > plan
> >> > > > to
> >> > > > > > deal
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> with the fact that we already have a
> >> > > feature
> >> > > > > (in
> >> > > > > > > 4.6
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> and
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> later) that allows you to use the
> >> > existing
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> volume-snapshot APIs to create a
> >> volume
> >> > > > > snapshot
> >> > > > > > > (for
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> managed
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> storage) that resides on a backend
> SAN
> >> > > > (using a
> >> > > > > > > > custom
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> snapshot strategy and a custom data
> >> > motion
> >> > > > > > > strategy).
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> If these new APIs go in, then how
> >> should
> >> > > the
> >> > > > > > > original
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> implementation (present in 4.6 and
> >> later)
> >> > > be
> >> > > > > > > changed?
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> If it
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > is
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> changed, how do we support customers
> >> who
> >> > > are
> >> > > > > > > already
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> using
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> original volume-snapshot API to take
> >> > > > snapshots
> >> > > > > > on a
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> backend
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > SAN?
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Mike
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 11:27 AM,
> Will
> >> > > > Stevens <
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> wstev...@cloudops.com
> <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Will you be able to create a
> Template
> >> > > from a
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > StorageSnapshot?
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> If yes, will the template be stored
> >> in
> >> > the
> >> > > > > > > secondary
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> storage like normal templates or
> will
> >> > that
> >> > > > be
> >> > > > > > > > handled
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> somehow on the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > vendor side?
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> *Will STEVENS*
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Lead Developer
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions
> >> Experts
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec
> >> *|*
> >> > > H3J
> >> > > > > 1S6
> >> > > > > > w
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 1:22 PM,
> Syed
> >> > > > Mushtaq <
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> syed1.mush...@gmail.com
> >> <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Will!!!
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 1:19 PM,
> Will
> >> > > > Stevens
> >> > > > > <
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> wstev...@cloudops.com
> >> <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I explicitly linked the Design
> >> Spec in
> >> > > the
> >> > > > > > Jira
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> ticket because it was not clear
> in
> >> the
> >> > > > > > 'mention'
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> section because it shows as a
> page
> >> > 'you
> >> > > do
> >> > > > > not
> >> > > > > > > > have
> >> > > > > > > > > > > permission to'.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *Will STEVENS*
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Lead Developer
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions
> >> Experts
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|*
> Quebec
> >> > *|*
> >> > > > H3J
> >> > > > > > 1S6
> >> > > > > > > w
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 1:02 PM,
> >> Syed
> >> > > Ahmed
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> <sah...@cloudops.com
> >> <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Design Spec:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Sto
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> rageSnapshot++API
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jira Ticket
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 27
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 8
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi All,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> We plan to propose a new set of
> >> APIs
> >> > to
> >> > > > do
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> snapshots on managed storage
> >> backends
> >> > > > like
> >> > > > > > > > > SolidFire.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Snapshots on current managed
> >> storage
> >> > > stay
> >> > > > > on
> >> > > > > > > the
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> device which is contrary to what
> >> > > > CloudStack
> >> > > > > > > calls
> >> > > > > > > > > > > snpshots.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> But taking snapshots on storage
> >> and
> >> > > > keeping
> >> > > > > > it
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> there has its own advantages
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > and
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> we would ideally like to have
> both
> >> > ways
> >> > > > of
> >> > > > > > > doing
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> snapshots. This proposal adds 4
> >> new
> >> > > APIs
> >> > > > to
> >> > > > > > > > create
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> snapshots on backend storage.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you guys think of this
> >> > > feature? I
> >> > > > > > would
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> love to have some feedback. I am
> >> > > working
> >> > > > on
> >> > > > > > > > making
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> the design
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > spec
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> more concrete but wanted to
> have a
> >> > high
> >> > > > > level
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> feedback first before starting
> to
> >> > work
> >> > > on
> >> > > > > it.
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -Syed
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> --
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> *Mike Tutkowski*
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> *Senior CloudStack Developer,
> >> SolidFire
> >> > > Inc.*
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> >> > > > <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> 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
> >> > > <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> 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
> >> > <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> 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
> >> <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> 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
> >> <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > o: 303.746.7302
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <
> >> > > http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play
> >> > > > > >*™*
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of
> >> > > > CloudStack
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > related
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > services:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > IaaS Cloud Design & Build
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <
> >> > http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
> >> > > |
> >> > > > > > > > CSForge –
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > rapid IaaS deployment framework <
> >> > > > > > > http://shapeblue.com/csforge/
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > CloudStack Consulting
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/
> >
> >> |
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > CloudStack
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Software Engineering
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <
> >> > > http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > CloudStack Infrastructure Support
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <
> >> > > > http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > |
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > <http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > *Mike Tutkowski*
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > o: 303.746.7302
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
> >> > > > > > > > > > > > <
> http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play
> >> > >*™*
> >> > > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of
> >> CloudStack
> >> > > > > related
> >> > > > > > > > > > services:
> >> > > > > > > > > > > IaaS Cloud Design & Build
> >> > > > > > > > > > > <http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//
> >
> >> |
> >> > > > > CSForge –
> >> > > > > > > > rapid
> >> > > > > > > > > > > IaaS deployment framework <
> >> http://shapeblue.com/csforge/
> >> > >
> >> > > > > > > CloudStack
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Consulting <
> >> http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/
> >> > >
> >> > > |
> >> > > > > > > > CloudStack
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Software Engineering
> >> > > > > > > > > > > <
> >> http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/>
> >> > > > > > > > > > > CloudStack Infrastructure Support
> >> > > > > > > > > > > <
> >> http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/
> >> > >
> >> > > |
> >> > > > > > > > CloudStack
> >> > > > > > > > > > > Bootcamp Training Courses <
> >> > > > > > > http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > > Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of
> >> CloudStack
> >> > > > related
> >> > > > > > > > > services:
> >> > > > > > > > > > IaaS Cloud Design & Build
> >> > > > > > > > > > <http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
> |
> >> > > > CSForge –
> >> > > > > > > rapid
> >> > > > > > > > > > IaaS deployment framework <
> >> http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
> >> > > > > > > > > > CloudStack Consulting <
> >> > > > > > http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/>
> >> > > > > > > |
> >> > > > > > > > > CloudStack
> >> > > > > > > > > > Software Engineering
> >> > > > > > > > > > <
> http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/>
> >> > > > > > > > > > CloudStack Infrastructure Support
> >> > > > > > > > > > <
> >> http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/>
> >> > |
> >> > > > > > > CloudStack
> >> > > > > > > > > > Bootcamp Training Courses <
> >> > > > > > http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > > *Mike Tutkowski*
> >> > > > > > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> >> > > > > > > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com <javascript:;>
> <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > > > 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 <javascript:;>
> >> > > > > o: 303.746.7302
> >> > > > > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
> >> > > > > <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > --
> >> > > > Ian Rae
> >> > > > CEO | PDG
> >> > > > c: 514.944.4008
> >> > > >
> >> > > > CloudOps | Cloud Infrastructure and Networking Solutions
> >> > > > www.cloudops.com | 420 rue Guy | Montreal | Canada | H3J 1S6
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > *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>*™*
>
