Re: [openstack-dev] Re-initializing or dynamically configuring cinder driver

2013-12-16 Thread Mark McLoughlin
Hi, On Sat, 2013-12-14 at 10:23 +0530, iKhan wrote: > Hi All, > > At present cinder driver can be only configured with adding entries in conf > file. Once these driver related entries are modified or added in conf file, > we need to restart cinder-volume service to validate the conf entries and >

Re: [openstack-dev] Re-initializing or dynamically configuring cinder driver

2013-12-16 Thread Joshua Harlow
Ah, u might be able to do what u said. Try it out and see how far u can get :) I would be interested to know how u plan on waiting for all existing operations to finish. Maybe it's not so hard, not really sure... Sent from my really tiny device... On Dec 15, 2013, at 9:43 PM, "iKhan" mailto:ik

Re: [openstack-dev] Re-initializing or dynamically configuring cinder driver

2013-12-15 Thread iKhan
Ok, I though we can make make cinder-volume aware of SIGTERM call and make sure it terminates with cleaning all the existing operations. If its not possible then probably SIGHUB is the only solution. :( On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 10:25 AM, Joshua Harlow wrote: > It depends on the "corruption" that

Re: [openstack-dev] Re-initializing or dynamically configuring cinder driver

2013-12-15 Thread Joshua Harlow
It depends on the "corruption" that u are willing to tolerate. Sigterm means the process just terminates, what if said process was 3/4 through some operation (create_volume for example)?? Personally I am willing to tolerate zero corruption, reliability and consistency are foundational things fo

Re: [openstack-dev] Re-initializing or dynamically configuring cinder driver

2013-12-15 Thread iKhan
How about sending SIGTERM to child processes and then starting them? I know this is the hard way of achieving the objective and SIGHUP approach will handle it more gracefully. As you mentioned it is a major change, tentatively can we use SIGTERM to achieve the objective? On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 9

Re: [openstack-dev] Re-initializing or dynamically configuring cinder driver

2013-12-15 Thread Joshua Harlow
In your proposal does it means that the child process will be restarted (that means kill -9 or sigint??). If so, without taskflow to help (or other solution) that means operations in progress will be corrupted/lost. That seems bad... A SIGHUP approach could be handled more gracefully (but it doe

Re: [openstack-dev] Re-initializing or dynamically configuring cinder driver

2013-12-15 Thread Mike Perez
On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 3:08 AM, iKhan wrote: > I don't know if this is being planned in Icehouse, if not probably > proposing an approach will help. We have seen cinder-volume service > initialization part. Similarly if we can get our hands on child process > that are running under cinder-volume

Re: [openstack-dev] Re-initializing or dynamically configuring cinder driver

2013-12-15 Thread iKhan
I don't know if this is being planned in Icehouse, if not probably proposing an approach will help. We have seen cinder-volume service initialization part. Similarly if we can get our hands on child process that are running under cinder-volume service, if we terminate those process and restart them

Re: [openstack-dev] Re-initializing or dynamically configuring cinder driver

2013-12-14 Thread Joshua Harlow
I don't currently know of a one size fits all solution here. There was talk at the summit of having the cinder app respond to a SIGHUP signal and attempting to reload config on this signal. Dynamic reloading is tricky business (basically u need to unravel anything holding references to the old c