I think it's due to this https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Zone-wide+primary+storage+target There are zone-wide storages, may only work with one particular hypervisor. For example, the data store created on VCenter can be shared by all the clusters in a DC, but only for vmware. And, CloudStack supports multiple hypervisors in one Zone, so, somehow, need a way to tell mgt server, for a particular zone-wide storage, which can only work with certain hypervisors. You can treat hypervisor type on the storage pool, is another tag, to help storage pool allocator to find proper storage pool. But seems hypervisor type is not enough for your case, as your storage pool can work with both vmware/xenserver, but not for other hypervisors(that's your current code's implementation limitation, not your storage itself can't do that). So I'd think you need to extend ZoneWideStoragePoolAllocator, maybe, a new allocator called: solidfirezonewidestoragepoolAllocator. And, replace the following line in applicationContext.xml: <bean id="zoneWideStoragePoolAllocator" class="org.apache.cloudstack.storage.allocator.ZoneWideStoragePoolAllocator" /> With your solidfirezonewidestoragepoolAllocator It also means, for each CloudStack mgt server deployment, admin needs to configure applicationContext.xml for their needs.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com] > Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 11:34 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Hypervisor Host Type Required at Zone Level for Primary Storage? > > Hi, > > I recently updated my local repo and noticed that we now require a > hypervisor type to be associated with zone-wide primary storage. > > I was wondering what the motivation for this might be? > > In my case, my zone-wide primary storage represents a SAN. Volumes are > carved out of the SAN as needed and can currently be utilized on both Xen > and VMware (although, of course, once you've used a given volume on one > hypervisor type or the other, you can only continue to use it with that > hypervisor type). > > I guess the point being my primary storage can be associated with more than > one hypervisor type because of its dynamic nature. > > Can someone fill me in on the reasons behind this recent change and > recommendations on how I should proceed here? > > Thanks! > > -- > *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> > *(tm)*
