I should point at ceph, and specifically the ceph rados gateway (rgw),
as it's been mentioned before in this thread. As you may know, ceph has
already been integrated with cloudstack through the ceph block storage
(rbd). So installations that already use ceph through that may get two
for the price of one. Also, with rgw you can access data both through
the swift api, and through the S3 api. It supports both the S3
multi-part upload, and the swift big-file upload api.
We'll be happy to assist with getting rgw to seamlessly work within
cloudstack.
Yehuda
On 07/09/2013 01:14 PM, Edison Su wrote:
It sounds like there are a lot of work to do, to support multi-part upload:
http://www.mirantis.com/blog/large-objects-in-cloud-storages/
" As you can see, Amazon S3 API is more high-level while Swift API for large objects
is pretty raw. Swift doesn't make a distinction between objects and object parts. This
means it's the user's duty to take care of the parts. E.g., you should make sure that the
prefix in the manifest doesn't match other objects by mistake. If you want to delete an
object, you have to remove its parts as well, and so on."
So it's a new issue that not happened on previous release.
-----Original Message-----
From: John Burwell [mailto:jburw...@basho.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2013 12:57 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: 'Chip Childers'
Subject: Re: Swift in 4.2 is broken, anybody wants it to be supported in 4.2?
Edison,
Swift does not support S3 multi-part uploads [1] which CloudStack must use
in order to store files larger than 5 GB. Therefore, using the Swift's S3
compatibility layer is not a viable workaround.
Thanks,
-John
[1]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Swift/APIFeatureComparison
On Jul 9, 2013, at 2:12 PM, Edison Su <edison...@citrix.com> wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 1:26 PM
To: Edison Su
Cc: <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Swift in 4.2 is broken, anybody wants it to be supported in 4.2?
On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 05:15:19PM +0000, Edison Su wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 6:46 AM
To: <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>; Edison Su
Subject: Re: Swift in 4.2 is broken, anybody wants it to be
supported in
4.2?
On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 9:22 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 5:29 PM, Edison Su <edison...@citrix.com>
wrote:
Due to object store refactor, Swift is broken. The reason, is
that, we only
have S3 test environment in our lab, so only S3 is tested for now.
Before adding the feature back, I'd better ask from, the
community, do
we want to support Swift? If so, which version of Swift? This will
take some efforts to support Swift, are there any volunteers can
help the
integration?
Whats the bug ID for this?
Unplanned/Unannounced deprecation of a feature is a blocker IMO.
It engenders a bad relationship with our users, and strands them
on previous versions with no good migration/upgrade path.
--David
Edison, How broken is it? Is it shorter to fix or revert the
object store changes?
It's not working at all. Not sure, revert object store will change
it or not, as
this feature is not tested by QA for a long time.
So any idea what the effort of fixing it looks like? I mean, just
because it
If it's ok to use S3 api talking to swift, then there is zero effort to support
Swift.
But who will make the decision?
wasn't tested in the last couple of releases doesn't necessarily mean
that it wasn't working. As Sudha mentioned, it wasn't tested only
because of a lack of change that triggered the expected need to
perform regression testing of that feature.
I believe that this was an honest mistake, but we need to figure out
what to do. I'm -1 on us saying "we'll drop Swift support". If
necessary, I'd say that we need to roll back the object-store branch
merge... I don't want to see that happen though. That's why I'm asking
about effort to fix it.
-chip
