Hi Edison, I haven't looked into this much, so maybe what I suggest here won't make sense, but here goes:
What about a Hypervisor.MULTIPLE enum option ('Hypervisor' might not be the name of the enumeration...I forget). The ZoneWideStoragePoolAllocator could use this to be less choosy about if a storage pool qualifies to be used. Does that make any sense? Thanks! On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:28 AM, Edison Su <edison...@citrix.com> wrote: > 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)* > -- *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> *™*