Just sent you an e-mail chain under the subject: [DISCUSS/PROPOSAL] Upgrading Driver Model
On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 2:17 PM, SuichII, Christopher <chris.su...@netapp.com > wrote: > Well then, I think sending back a list of supported operations with > volumes would be a good start. Eventually, this could be extended to have > supported fields as well. While it does cost some overhead up front to load > the supported operations from storage providers when listing volumes, I > think it is simpler overall than introducing new APIs for querying for that > information. > > -- > Chris Suich > chris.su...@netapp.com > NetApp Software Engineer > Data Center Platforms – Cloud Solutions > Citrix, Cisco & Red Hat > > On Oct 9, 2013, at 3:45 PM, Mike Tutkowski <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> > wrote: > > > "Has there been any thoughts to allow storage providers to indicate which > > features they support?" > > > > We talked about this for a while at the CloudStack Collaboration > Conference > > in Santa Clara. > > > > Right now, this is not supported and that's a serious problem. > > > > This kind of ties in with Storage Tagging and how that is problematic, as > > well. > > > > With Storage Tagging, there is no indication of what storage provider > > supports the Compute or Disk Offering in question and, as such, we don't > > know what fields to show to or hide from users. > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 1:32 PM, SuichII, Christopher < > chris.su...@netapp.com > >> wrote: > > > >> Just bumping this since there haven't been any responses. > >> > >> Does anyone have any thoughts on this? I'm ready and prepared to do the > >> work, but I don't want to move on if people have concerns with this > >> approach or can think of a better solution. > >> > >> -Chris > >> -- > >> Chris Suich > >> chris.su...@netapp.com<mailto:chris.su...@netapp.com> > >> NetApp Software Engineer > >> Data Center Platforms – Cloud Solutions > >> Citrix, Cisco & Red Hat > >> > >> On Oct 8, 2013, at 4:53 PM, Chris Suich <chris.su...@netapp.com<mailto: > >> chris.su...@netapp.com>> wrote: > >> > >> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > >> https://reviews.apache.org/r/14522/ > >> > >> > >> On October 8th, 2013, 8:18 p.m. UTC, edison su wrote: > >> > >> ui/scripts/storage.js< > >> > https://reviews.apache.org/r/14522/diff/1/?file=362033#file362033line1763> > >> (Diff revision 1) > >> > >> getActionFilter: function() { > >> > >> > >> 1763 > >> > >> revertSnapshot: { > >> > >> > >> The ui change here, is there way to disable it from ui, if the storage > >> provider is not NetApp? Or move the ui change into your plugin? > >> > >> This raises the question of whether people expect to see the revert > >> snapshot functionality for hypervisors or just storage providers. I > figured > >> that the hypervisor functionality would be desired, but it sounds like > that > >> may not be the case for all hypervisors. > >> > >> Has there been any thoughts to allow storage providers to indicate which > >> features they support? Maybe part of the VolumeResponse can be a set of > >> flags for which operations are supported (take snapshot, revert > snapshot, > >> etc.). This way, the UI can dynamically show/hide supported actions > without > >> knowing who the volume's storage provider actually is. This should be a > >> fairly straight forward UI change, but would require adding methods to > the > >> storage provider interface. If we don't want to always load this > >> information just for the VolumeResponse, we could expose new APIs to > query > >> which operations are supported for a given volume, but we may not want > to > >> go exposing APIs for this. > >> > >> Any thoughts? > >> > >> > >> - Chris > >> > >> > >> On October 7th, 2013, 8:26 p.m. UTC, Chris Suich wrote: > >> > >> Review request for cloudstack, Brian Federle and edison su. > >> By Chris Suich. > >> > >> Updated Oct. 7, 2013, 8:26 p.m. > >> > >> Repository: cloudstack-git > >> Description > >> > >> After the last batch of work to the revertSnapshot API, > >> SnapshotServiceImpl was not tied into the workflow to be used by storage > >> providers. I have added the logic in a similar fashion to > takeSnapshot(), > >> backupSnapshot() and deleteSnapshot(). > >> > >> I have also added a 'Revert to Snapshot' action to the volume snapshots > >> list in the UI. > >> > >> > >> Testing > >> > >> I have tested all of this locally with a custom storage provider. > >> > >> Unfortunately, I'm still in the middle of figuring out how to properly > >> unit test this type of code. If anyone has any recommendations, please > let > >> me know. > >> > >> > >> Diffs > >> > >> * > >> > api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/user/snapshot/RevertSnapshotCmd.java > >> (946eebd) > >> * client/WEB-INF/classes/resources/messages.properties (f92b85a) > >> * client/tomcatconf/commands.properties.in (58c770d) > >> * > >> > engine/storage/snapshot/src/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/snapshot/SnapshotServiceImpl.java > >> (c09adca) > >> * server/src/com/cloud/server/ManagementServerImpl.java (0a0fcdc) > >> * server/src/com/cloud/storage/snapshot/SnapshotManagerImpl.java > >> (0b53cfd) > >> * ui/dictionary.jsp (f93f9dc) > >> * ui/scripts/storage.js (88fb9f2) > >> > >> View Diff<https://reviews.apache.org/r/14522/diff/> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > -- > > *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> > > *™* > > -- *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> *™*
