Andrei, There's a thread "LTS Releases" in the dev list, we should continue this discussion there.
-- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Andrei Mikhailovsky" <and...@arhont.com> > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org > Sent: Tuesday, 25 November, 2014 13:02:00 > Subject: Re: Xenserver and CEPH ? > +1 for the LTS releases. Majority of falks in production needs to have a > stable > release. > > I agree that it will make the release cycle more complex, however, if the > result > will improve the stability of the product i think it's worth the extra hustle. > > Also, it might improve the release times as current releases are often delayed > by many months! > > I want to see the CloudStack as the rock solid cloud platform rather than a > bloated oversized sponge full of holes. I am sure a lot of people will agree. > > Andrei > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Erik Weber" <terbol...@gmail.com> > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org > Sent: Tuesday, 25 November, 2014 10:21:55 AM > Subject: Re: Xenserver and CEPH ? > > Those who wants the new features? Those who're not running production? > Labs? > > I agree that the idea isn't bulletproof, and might not even be possible > with the way things are, but I do like the thought of LTS. > > Erik > > On Tue Nov 25 2014 at 10:51:32 AM Nux! <n...@li.nux.ro> wrote: > >> Erik, >> >> It will complicate release management and it will also attract most of the >> users.. who will tests the rest of the releases? >> >> However as someone who is using CentOS instead of Fedora, I do like the >> idea. :-) >> >> Would be interesting to hear ideas from some of the more hard core devs on >> this. >> >> -- >> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! >> >> Nux! >> www.nux.ro >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "Erik Weber" <terbol...@gmail.com> >> > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org >> > Sent: Tuesday, 25 November, 2014 09:34:53 >> > Subject: Re: Xenserver and CEPH ? >> >> > How about a LTS version (basically what 4.3 currently is) that undergoes >> > longer testing and receives bugfix releases for a certain amount of time? >> > >> > This is not a true proposal, just venting the idea. I'd even say that new >> > features would have to be in one normal release before it's included in a >> > LTS release. >> > >> > One drawback is that it most likely complicates release management. >> > >> > -- >> > Erik >> > >> > On Tue Nov 25 2014 at 2:06:40 AM Nux! <n...@li.nux.ro> wrote: >> > >> >> Slightly pissed at the "switched to Openstack" remark. >> >> Using Openstack as a means to "force/suggest" new features into ACS is >> >> silly. I also want KVM snapshotting to happen, but I think there are >> more >> >> important things to fix first. >> >> >> >> In my personal view, I wish ACS stopped completely development on new >> >> features for a while and made the current features rock solid. >> >> >> >> I know we need new features to keep developers happy who would otherwise >> >> slit their veins from boredom, but I personally do not care that much >> for >> >> S3 compatibility or SDN or what not. When my deployment will be large >> >> enough to need that I'll probably have enough money to develop them >> myself >> >> (and contribute them back). >> >> >> >> Most people do not need FreeIPA or who knows what other bells and >> whistles. >> >> I do like Openstack, I know & like some people involved with it and I >> >> use(d) it (was even a mod on the RDO forum), but I don't want the bloody >> >> kitchen sink in my servers. I want peace of mind and reliable services >> for >> >> my customers who also don't give a rat's arse about said features; all >> they >> >> want is their application or site to work 24/7. >> >> >> >> Personally I want everything that we have NOW fixed, polished; usage >> stats >> >> working (with SG zones), proper backup and restore of volumes, security >> >> groups finalised (hello IPv6, it's almost 2015!), no silly GUI mistakes >> or >> >> typos in new releases and so on. >> >> >> >> Competing with Openstack head on is a dead end, stop chasing! Everybody >> >> pushes all sorts of stuff into it which takes a lot of time, effort and >> >> money to get working, if at all. >> >> Average Joe will not use that in production, just like he won't use >> >> Gentoo, Fedora or Archlinux in production, it sucks; you use battle >> tested >> >> stuff like CentOS or Ubuntu LTS. >> >> >> >> For Average "IT manager" Joe to be capable of using Openstack in >> >> production companies like Mirantis or eNovance need to take their time, >> >> freeze it, slow it the fsck down, polish it, decide which features >> can't be >> >> used actually (many, I bet!), package it in a sexy wrapping and then >> put it >> >> up for sale (or download). >> >> >> >> Basically they'll have to build a Cloudstack. We're already there! Sort >> of >> >> ... :-) >> >> >> >> /rant >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! >> >> >> >> Nux! >> >> www.nux.ro >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> > From: "Outback Dingo" <outbackdi...@gmail.com> >> >> > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org >> >> > Sent: Monday, 24 November, 2014 22:15:40 >> >> > Subject: Re: Xenserver and CEPH ? >> >> >> >> > On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com >> > >> >> > wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> On Nov 24, 2014, at 4:03 PM, Andrei Mikhailovsky <and...@arhont.com> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> > Yes, agree! Proper snapshotting is a must and an essential part of >> the >> >> >> cloud in my world. Having this feature broken in KVM for many years >> is a >> >> >> big blow to CloudStack in my opinion. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > I am already seeing on blogs and mailing lists people switching to >> >> >> OpenStack because of this problem. >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > there are many aspects of which cloustack is loosing ground fast to >> >> > openstack. Even Ive moved away from CS due to deficiencies such as the >> >> NFS >> >> > as secondary being required, vague support for open source SDN such as >> >> > opendaylight, is another >> >> > while CS is nice and quite easy to install, and get working, and >> being a >> >> > big XEN fan, CS made it clean and simply to deploy, however, it does >> lack >> >> > some of the higher end features and configuration aspects that are >> found >> >> in >> >> > openstack. Now while I >> >> > also find openstack to be very KVM aligned, as it requires a client be >> >> > installed on XEN, where CS doesnt, Openstack has moved well ahead in >> >> > storage and networking options, not boxing me in to high cost >> commercial >> >> > solutions. I will credit CS people >> >> > for great support in the past years over IRC, though lately even that >> >> seems >> >> > waning, as as such there also seems to be more "commercial" support >> for >> >> > openstack with the likes of mirantis, ibm, hp and others pushing turn >> key >> >> > distros, open source some at that. >> >> > I did love the simplicity of CS and XEN as a configuration, but felt >> the >> >> > lacking in areas of "integration" with other technologies. Even >> openstack >> >> > is working to integrate the freeIpa system, and opendaylight into the >> >> > options, and it works well with ceph, gluster, >> >> > and other storage systems. CS is simple, and in being that, they are >> >> > loosing ground fast to the expansive capabilities openstack is >> offering >> >> > with their latest release. I wish CS would expand their horizons a >> bit, >> >> and >> >> > not appear so short sighted and narrow minded >> >> > when it came to its offerings and integration. I know if I was running >> >> the >> >> > product line currently I would be aligning CS with all the >> technologies >> >> > becoming available, especially Software defined networking, and >> software >> >> > defined storage. CS is great, but requires >> >> > a larger feature set, more integration and further vision on trending >> >> > technologies, yet it is just damn simple to install CS and XEN...... a >> >> big >> >> > win there for CS, though Fuel and Helion appear to be quickly closing >> >> that >> >> > gap. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> Can you send links, I am curious ! >> >> >> >> >> >> thxs >> >> >> >> >> >> > I hate to see people leaving CloudStack as I think it's fantastic >> >> >> project and a really great community! >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Andrei >> >> >> > >> >> >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> From: "Andrija Panic" <andrija.pa...@gmail.com> >> >> >> >> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org >> >> >> >> Sent: Monday, 24 November, 2014 8:33:56 PM >> >> >> >> Subject: Re: Xenserver and CEPH ? >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> So no CEPH support fot Xen, and no VM snapshot for KVM. >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> So, should I shoot my self with gun or with the pistol, that is >> the >> >> >> >> question now :) >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> thx folks >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> On 24 November 2014 at 18:01, Adrian Lewis >> >> >> >> <adr...@alsiconsulting.co.uk> >> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> >>> From what I've read there won’t be support for Ceph in Creedence >> >> >> >>> (Xenserver >> >> >> >>> 6.5) but it is on the cards for the following release (as should >> >> >> >>> NFSv4 and >> >> >> >>> a >> >> >> >>> Centos 7 dom0). There's a blog post from Tim Mackey at: >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> http://xenserver.org/discuss-virtualization/virtualization- >> >> blog/entry/beyond-creedence-xenserver-2015-planning.html >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> and a Youtube video with a few updates here: >> >> >> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JFUkEfpXaQ >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> All looks promising but I'm impatient :-( >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >> >> >> >>> From: Andrija Panic [mailto:andrija.pa...@gmail.com] >> >> >> >>> Sent: 24 November 2014 15:08 >> >> >> >>> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org >> >> >> >>> Subject: Re: Xenserver and CEPH ? >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> THx Vadim - yes, I'm already using KVM with ceph for some time - >> >> >> >>> works fine >> >> >> >>> more or less :) thx >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> On 24 November 2014 at 15:52, Vadim Kimlaychuk >> >> >> >>> <vadim.kimlayc...@elion.ee> >> >> >> >>> wrote: >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>> XenServer 6.5 (or 7.0) is not released yet. You can download >> >> >> >>>> alpha of >> >> >> >>>> next release and try it, but it is definately not for >> production. >> >> >> >>>> I >> >> >> >>>> haven't personally tried it because Cloudstack does not support >> >> >> >>>> RBD >> >> >> >>>> storage type for XenServer yet. So you are absolutely right -- >> >> >> >>>> first >> >> >> >>>> we need to wait for XenServer to release then we need to wait >> for >> >> >> >>>> Cloudstack to implement those changes at backend. >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> I have used Ceph with KVM hypervisor for a short while. There >> >> >> >>>> were >> >> >> >>>> some points that I was not aware, but in general it worked well. >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> Vadim. >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> -----Original Message----- >> >> >> >>>> From: Andrija Panic [mailto:andrija.pa...@gmail.com] >> >> >> >>>> Sent: Monday, November 24, 2014 4:22 PM >> >> >> >>>> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org >> >> >> >>>> Subject: Re: Xenserver and CEPH ? >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> HI Vadim, thanks for info. That is what I understood = but the >> >> >> >>>> new >> >> >> >>>> XenServer 6.5 or whatever the name, shoudl be using kernel >> 3.10.x >> >> >> >>>> for >> >> >> >>>> dom0, so I guess even after that is supported, we will need to >> >> >> >>>> wait >> >> >> >>>> some time for the CloudStack implementation on this ? >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> Thanks anyway >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> On 24 November 2014 at 15:00, Vadim Kimlaychuk >> >> >> >>>> <vadim.kimlayc...@elion.ee> >> >> >> >>>> wrote: >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>>> Hi Andrija, >> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >> >>>>> For XenServer 6.2 it is not possible yet. Look for supported >> >> >> >>>>> SR-s >> >> >> >>>>> here: >> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> http://docs.vmd.citrix.com/XenServer/6.2.0/1.0/en_gb/ >> reference.html#ck >> >> >> >>>> _reference_storage_repository_types >> >> >> >>>>> Somewhere in internet I saw information that RBD support is >> >> >> >>>>> scheduled for the next major XenServer release. Can't find the >> >> >> >>>>> link >> >> >> >>>>> right away. >> >> >> >>>>> The problem connected to Ceph + RBD as primary storage for >> >> >> >>>>> XenServer is old dom0 kernel that does not allow RBD storage >> >> >> >>>>> type. >> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >> >>>>> Regards, >> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >> >>>>> Vadim. >> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >> >> >> >>>>> From: Andrija Panic [mailto:andrija.pa...@gmail.com] >> >> >> >>>>> Sent: Monday, November 24, 2014 2:06 PM >> >> >> >>>>> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org >> >> >> >>>>> Subject: Xenserver and CEPH ? >> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >> >>>>> Hi guys, >> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >> >>>>> anyone running ZenServer with CEPH as primary storage ? >> >> >> >>>>> I read some info that there is support for CEPH inside >> >> >> >>>>> XenServer >> >> >> >>>>> from last year - but since I never actually tried this - thus >> >> >> >>>>> the >> >> >> >>>>> question. >> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >> >>>>> Thanks, >> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >> >>>>> -- >> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >> >>>>> Andrija Panić >> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> -- >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>>> Andrija Panić >> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> -- >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> Andrija Panić >> >> >> >>> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Andrija Panić >> >> >>
