Re: [vdsm] [Users] glusterfs and ovirt
On 05/21/2012 06:15 AM, Bharata B Rao wrote: On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Dor Laor wrote: On 05/18/2012 04:28 PM, Deepak C Shetty wrote: On 05/17/2012 11:05 PM, Itamar Heim wrote: On 05/17/2012 06:55 PM, Bharata B Rao wrote: I am looking at GlusterFS integration with QEMU which involves adding GlusterFS as block backend in QEMU. This will involve QEMU talking to gluster directly via libglusterfs bypassing FUSE. I could specify a volume file and the VM image directly on QEMU command line to boot from the VM image that resides on a gluster volume. Eg: qemu -drive file=client.vol:/Fedora.img,format=gluster In this example, Fedora.img is being served by gluster and client.vol would have client-side translators specified. I am not sure if this use case would be served if GlusterFS is integrated as posixfs storage domain in VDSM. Posixfs would involve normal FUSE mount and QEMU would be required to work with images from FUSE mount path ? With QEMU supporting GlusterFS backend natively, further optimizations are possible in case of gluster volume being local to the host node. In this case, one could provide QEMU with a simple volume file that would not contain client or server xlators, but instead just the posix xlator. This would lead to most optimal IO path that bypasses RPC calls. So do you think, this use case (QEMU supporting GlusterFS backend natively and using volume file to specify the needed translators) warrants a specialized storage domain type for GlusterFS in VDSM ? I'm not sure if a special storage domain, or a PosixFS based domain with enhanced capabilities. Ayal? Related Question: With QEMU using GlusterFS backend natively (as described above), it also means that it needs addnl options/parameters as part of qemu command line (as given above). There is no support in qemu for gluster yet but it will be there not far away As I said above, I am working on this. Will post the patches shortly. /me apologize for the useless noise, I'm using a new thunderbird plugin that collapses quotes and it made me loss the context. Regards, Bharata. ___ vdsm-devel mailing list vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel
Re: [vdsm] Agenda for tomorrow's call
How about the new repository system latest status? http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#change,192 On 2012-5-21 3:55, Ayal Baron wrote: Hi all, I would like to discuss the following on our upcoming call: - reviewers are missing! - reviewers/verifiers are missing for pep8 patches. I would like to ask a volunteer to aggregate them all in one branch, and get some folks from Red Hat QE to run some sanity test on them. - functional tests: Wenchao Xia's http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#change,4454 and Adam Litke's http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#change,4451 - Saggi's unicode fixes to betterPopen - Stories about negative flows hurt by commit 1676396f18cf5c300d87e181 "Change safelease APIs to match SANLock flow" - Upcoming oVirt-3.1 release: when to break from master branch? Anyone else has more interesting stuff? We can skip my bullets for a few of yours if we do not have time. Regards, Dan. ___ vdsm-devel mailing list vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel -- Shu Ming IBM China Systems and Technology Laboratory ___ vdsm-devel mailing list vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel
Re: [vdsm] a problem with pepe8
On 05/18/2012 09:58 PM, Dan Kenigsberg wrote: On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 09:47:43PM +0800, ShaoHe Feng wrote: On 05/18/2012 08:30 PM, Dan Kenigsberg wrote: On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 06:57:10AM -0500, Adam Litke wrote: On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 03:56:05PM +0800, ShaoHe Feng wrote: a comment exceed 80 characters, and it is a url link. such as # http:///bb///eee/fff/ how can I do? is this OK? # "http://bb// # /eee/fff/" # (the link is too long to fit in one line, copy it and paste it to one line) It would be nice if we could annotate the source code to disable certain checks in places such as this. Clearly the rigid line length restriction would result in a less readable comment if followed here. Agreed. PEP-0008 is here to help us. If the script that enforces it is actually hurts readability in a certain case, we should not use it. Please fix other PEP-0008 issues in the file, and try to filter out the url warning. If impossible, the module would not be whitelisted. yes, pep8 has a option "--ignore=errors", but if this option is given when all the same type errors will be ignored. Hey, it is opensource. You can hack it to ignore specific error (and push upstream, and wait until it's in Fedora), or you can `grep -v` its output. can grep the output thank you. a good way. grep -v -e "\s*#\s\+http:" to ignore url that is too long ___ vdsm-devel mailing list vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel
[vdsm] constrain call supervdsm only to vdsm process
Hi guys, Went through current code and found calling supervdsm(function:getProxy()) is only called from threads of vdsm, and supervdsm can be called from other processes in current scheme. My plan to change supervdsm and vdsm startup process is meant to limit call of getProxy only to vdsm process and its threads, that is to say not allow subprocesses and other process to call super vdsm. I know we are going to move all the "sudo " to supervdsm, So I want to ask if my plan will make constraints to these or introduce other troubles? Thanks for your answer! ___ vdsm-devel mailing list vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel
Re: [vdsm] [Users] glusterfs and ovirt
On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Dor Laor wrote: > On 05/18/2012 04:28 PM, Deepak C Shetty wrote: >> >> On 05/17/2012 11:05 PM, Itamar Heim wrote: >>> >>> On 05/17/2012 06:55 PM, Bharata B Rao wrote: I am looking at GlusterFS integration with QEMU which involves adding GlusterFS as block backend in QEMU. This will involve QEMU talking to gluster directly via libglusterfs bypassing FUSE. I could specify a volume file and the VM image directly on QEMU command line to boot from the VM image that resides on a gluster volume. Eg: qemu -drive file=client.vol:/Fedora.img,format=gluster In this example, Fedora.img is being served by gluster and client.vol would have client-side translators specified. I am not sure if this use case would be served if GlusterFS is integrated as posixfs storage domain in VDSM. Posixfs would involve normal FUSE mount and QEMU would be required to work with images from FUSE mount path ? With QEMU supporting GlusterFS backend natively, further optimizations are possible in case of gluster volume being local to the host node. In this case, one could provide QEMU with a simple volume file that would not contain client or server xlators, but instead just the posix xlator. This would lead to most optimal IO path that bypasses RPC calls. So do you think, this use case (QEMU supporting GlusterFS backend natively and using volume file to specify the needed translators) warrants a specialized storage domain type for GlusterFS in VDSM ? >>> >>> >>> I'm not sure if a special storage domain, or a PosixFS based domain >>> with enhanced capabilities. >>> Ayal? >> >> >> Related Question: >> With QEMU using GlusterFS backend natively (as described above), it also >> means that >> it needs addnl options/parameters as part of qemu command line (as given >> above). > > > There is no support in qemu for gluster yet but it will be there not far > away As I said above, I am working on this. Will post the patches shortly. Regards, Bharata. -- http://bharata.sulekha.com/blog/posts.htm, http://raobharata.wordpress.com/ ___ vdsm-devel mailing list vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel
[vdsm] Agenda for tomorrow's call
Hi all, I would like to discuss the following on our upcoming call: - reviewers are missing! - reviewers/verifiers are missing for pep8 patches. I would like to ask a volunteer to aggregate them all in one branch, and get some folks from Red Hat QE to run some sanity test on them. - functional tests: Wenchao Xia's http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#change,4454 and Adam Litke's http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#change,4451 - Saggi's unicode fixes to betterPopen - Stories about negative flows hurt by commit 1676396f18cf5c300d87e181 "Change safelease APIs to match SANLock flow" - Upcoming oVirt-3.1 release: when to break from master branch? Anyone else has more interesting stuff? We can skip my bullets for a few of yours if we do not have time. Regards, Dan. ___ vdsm-devel mailing list vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel
Re: [vdsm] Agenda for today's call
On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 10:41:30PM +0800, ShaoHe Feng wrote: > I wonder this call is a phone call or on an IRC channel ? Phone call. See details in http://www.ovirt.org/wiki/Meetings#Meeting_Time_and_Place ___ vdsm-devel mailing list vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel
Re: [vdsm] [Users] glusterfs and ovirt
On 05/18/2012 04:28 PM, Deepak C Shetty wrote: On 05/17/2012 11:05 PM, Itamar Heim wrote: On 05/17/2012 06:55 PM, Bharata B Rao wrote: On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Itamar Heim wrote: On 05/15/2012 07:35 PM, Andrei Vakhnin wrote: Yair Thanks for an update. Can I have KVM hypervisors also function as storage nodes for glusterfs? What is a release date for glusterfs support? We're looking for a production deployment in June. Thanks current status is 1. patches for provisioning gluster clusters and volumes via ovirt are in review, trying to cover this feature set [1]. I'm not sure if all of them will make the ovirt 3.1 version which is slated to branch for stabilization June 1st, but i think "enough" is there. so i'd start trying current upstream version to help find issues blocking you, and following on them during june as we stabilize ovirt 3.1 for release (planned for end of june). 2. you should be able to use same hosts for both gluster and virt, but there is no special logic/handling for this yet (i.e., trying and providing feedback would help improve this mode). I would suggest start from separate clusters though first, and only later trying the joint mode. 3. creating a storage domain on top of gluster: - expose NFS on top of it, and consume as a normal nfs storage domain - use posixfs storage domain with gluster mount semantics - future: probably native gluster storage domain, up to native integration with qemu I am looking at GlusterFS integration with QEMU which involves adding GlusterFS as block backend in QEMU. This will involve QEMU talking to gluster directly via libglusterfs bypassing FUSE. I could specify a volume file and the VM image directly on QEMU command line to boot from the VM image that resides on a gluster volume. Eg: qemu -drive file=client.vol:/Fedora.img,format=gluster In this example, Fedora.img is being served by gluster and client.vol would have client-side translators specified. I am not sure if this use case would be served if GlusterFS is integrated as posixfs storage domain in VDSM. Posixfs would involve normal FUSE mount and QEMU would be required to work with images from FUSE mount path ? With QEMU supporting GlusterFS backend natively, further optimizations are possible in case of gluster volume being local to the host node. In this case, one could provide QEMU with a simple volume file that would not contain client or server xlators, but instead just the posix xlator. This would lead to most optimal IO path that bypasses RPC calls. So do you think, this use case (QEMU supporting GlusterFS backend natively and using volume file to specify the needed translators) warrants a specialized storage domain type for GlusterFS in VDSM ? I'm not sure if a special storage domain, or a PosixFS based domain with enhanced capabilities. Ayal? Related Question: With QEMU using GlusterFS backend natively (as described above), it also means that it needs addnl options/parameters as part of qemu command line (as given above). There is no support in qemu for gluster yet but it will be there not far away How does VDSM today support generating a custom qemu cmdline. I know VDSM talks to libvirt, so is there a framework in VDSM to edit/modify the domxml based on some pre-conditions, and how / where one should hook up to do that modification ? I know of libvirt hooks framework in VDSM, but that was more for temporary/experimental needs, or am i completely wrong here ? Irrespective of whether GlusterFS integrates into VDSM as PosixFS or special storage domain it won't address the need to generate a custom qemu cmdline if a file/image was served by GlusterFS. Whats the way to address this issue in VDSM ? I am assuming here that special storage domain (aka repo engine) is only to manage image repository, and image related operations, won't help in modifying qemu cmd line being generated. [Ccing vdsm-devel also] thanx, deepak ___ vdsm-devel mailing list vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel ___ vdsm-devel mailing list vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel
