My first thought was to do a singled fixed disk and never resize that disk at all. If you need space, you have to use a volume service.
Ultimately, I don't think this the right approach either, but it solves the initial use case of needing more storage space. On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Chris Behrens <chris.behr...@rackspace.com>wrote: > > On Sep 2, 2011, at 8:07 AM, Paul Voccio wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Soren Hansen <so...@linux2go.dk> wrote: > > [...] > > The potential for filesystem bugs that could bring the host down gives > > me the heebie jeebies. I really, really don't want to mount people's > > filesystems. > > > > > > Can you explain a bit more here? I would like to understand your > concerns. I would advocate mounting in a utility VM if you mean to protect > from mounting instance with malicious data. We may have to do this to expand > partitions or resize down for Windows. > > Mounting someone's filesystem should not be necessary if we have certain > restrictions on the management. I.e., we could say we will only resize the > last filesystem in the partition table. That would avoid needing to know > the filesystem layout in the image (looking at /etc/fstab or updating it). > Not sure that's a desired restriction, however. > > That said, we'd still need to attach the VM disk somewhere and run fs > resize utils... and it might still be best to do this in a utility VM. > > - Chris > > This email may include confidential information. If you received it in > error, please delete it. > >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp