What do we do, though, if the storage can only work on a subset of the ones listed in the enum?
For example, XenServer and VMware. On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Edison Su <edison...@citrix.com> wrote: > There are storages which can only work with one hypervisor, > e.g. Currently, Ceph can only work on KVM. And the data store created in > VCenter, can only work with Vmware. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com] > > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 1:12 PM > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > Subject: Re: Hypervisor Host Type Required at Zone Level for Primary > Storage? > > > > I figured you might have something to say about this, John. :) > > > > Yeah, I have no idea behind the motivation for this change other than > what > > Edison just said in a recent e-mail. > > > > It sounds like this change went in so that the allocators could look at > the VM > > characteristics and see the hypervisor type. With this info, the > allocator can > > decide if a particular zone-wide storage is acceptable. This doesn't > apply for > > my situation as I'm dealing with a SAN, but some zone-wide storage is > static > > (just a volume "out there" somewhere). Once this volume is used for, say, > > XenServer purposes, it can only be used for XenServer going forward. > > > > For more details, I would recommend Edison comment. > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 2:01 PM, John Burwell <jburw...@basho.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Mike, > > > > > > I know my thoughts will come as a galloping shock, but the idea of a > > > hypervisor type being attached to a volume is the type of dependency I > > > think we need to remove from the Storage layer. What attributes of a > > > DataStore/StoragePool require association to a hypervisor type? My > > > thought is that we should expose query methods allow the Hypervisor > > > layer to determine if a DataStore/StoragePool requires such a > > > reservation, and we track that reservation in the Hypervisor layer. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > -John > > > > > > On Jun 17, 2013, at 3:48 PM, Mike Tutkowski > > > <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Edison, > > > > > > > > How's about if I add this logic into ZoneWideStoragePoolAllocator > > > (below)? > > > > > > > > After filtering storage pools by tags, it saves off the ones that > > > > are for any hypervisor. > > > > > > > > Next, we filter the list down more by hypervisor. > > > > > > > > Then, we add the storage pools back into the list that were for any > > > > hypervisor. > > > > > > > > @Override > > > > > > > > protected List<StoragePool> select(DiskProfile dskCh, > > > > > > > > VirtualMachineProfile<? extends VirtualMachine> vmProfile, > > > > > > > > DeploymentPlan plan, ExcludeList avoid, int returnUpTo) { > > > > > > > > s_logger.debug("ZoneWideStoragePoolAllocator to find storage > > > > pool"); > > > > > > > > List<StoragePool> suitablePools = new ArrayList<StoragePool>(); > > > > > > > > > > > > List<StoragePoolVO> storagePools = > > > > > > _storagePoolDao.findZoneWideStoragePoolsByTags(plan.getDataCenterId( > > > > ), > > > > dskCh.getTags()); > > > > > > > > > > > > if (storagePools == null) { > > > > > > > > storagePools = new ArrayList<StoragePoolVO>(); > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > List<StoragePoolVO> anyHypervisorStoragePools = > > > > newArrayList<StoragePoolVO>(); > > > > > > > > > > > > for (StoragePoolVO storagePool : storagePools) { > > > > > > > > if > > > > (storagePool.getHypervisor().equals(HypervisorType.Any)) { > > > > > > > > anyHypervisorStoragePools.add(storagePool); > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > List<StoragePoolVO> storagePoolsByHypervisor = > > > > > > > > > _storagePoolDao.findZoneWideStoragePoolsByHypervisor(plan.getDataCent > > e > > > rId(), > > > > dskCh.getHypervisorType()); > > > > > > > > > > > > storagePools.retainAll(storagePoolsByHypervisor); > > > > > > > > > > > > storagePools.addAll(anyHypervisorStoragePools); > > > > > > > > > > > > // add remaining pools in zone, that did not match tags, to > > > > avoid set > > > > > > > > List<StoragePoolVO> allPools = > > > > > > _storagePoolDao.findZoneWideStoragePoolsByTags(plan.getDataCenterId( > > > > ), > > > > null); > > > > > > > > allPools.removeAll(storagePools); > > > > > > > > for (StoragePoolVO pool : allPools) { > > > > > > > > avoid.addPool(pool.getId()); > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > for (StoragePoolVO storage : storagePools) { > > > > > > > > if (suitablePools.size() == returnUpTo) { > > > > > > > > break; > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > StoragePool pol = (StoragePool)this.dataStoreMgr > > > > .getPrimaryDataStore(storage.getId()); > > > > > > > > if (filter(avoid, pol, dskCh, plan)) { > > > > > > > > suitablePools.add(pol); > > > > > > > > } else { > > > > > > > > avoid.addPool(pol.getId()); > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > return suitablePools; > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Mike Tutkowski < > > > > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote: > > > > > > > >> 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+prima > > > ry+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.ZoneWideStoragePoolAllocat > > or" > > > >>> /> > > > >>> 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> > > > >> *(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> > > > > *(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> > > *(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> *™*
