I think the quickest, easiest change would be to keep using the tag name as the key in the details table, but use a unique value like ‘storage_tag’ instead of ‘true’. This wouldn’t require any major logic changes, just the value used to check whether something is a storage tag.
It is quite risky for 4.3. However my concern is that if we let this ship with 4.3, then any plugin that wants to use a storage pool detail with the value ‘true’ will make updating the storage tag system MUCH more difficult. As far as I can tell, there is no other way to determine if something is a storage tag than checking if the details table value is ‘true’. If there are other details with the value ‘true’, then we wouldn’t be able to differentiate between them for a DB upgrade between versions. -Chris -- Chris Suich chris.su...@netapp.com NetApp Software Engineer Data Center Platforms – Cloud Solutions Citrix, Cisco & Red Hat On Jan 24, 2014, at 9:53 AM, Mike Tutkowski <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote: > I think at some point we need to use a key/value for storage tags such as > the following: > > storageTags=value1,value2,value3 > > The problem with that is you have to parse the value cell each time you > pull it out of the DB. > > That might be too risky of a change, though, for 4.3 at this point. > > > On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 5:24 AM, SuichII, Christopher < > chris.su...@netapp.com> wrote: > >> I have found an additional issue related to this. The allocators do >> properly ignore any storage pool details whose value is true that is not >> actually a storage pool. However, the list storage pools API does NOT. When >> creating the StoragePoolResponse, it is still assumed that any storage pool >> detail with the value ‘true’ is a storage tag. >> >> For my plugin targeting 4.3, we create a storage pool detail with a >> true/false value, so this causes a problem with the storage pool UI. >> >> Any thoughts on how to fix this? >> >> -Chris >> -- >> Chris Suich >> chris.su...@netapp.com >> NetApp Software Engineer >> Data Center Platforms – Cloud Solutions >> Citrix, Cisco & Red Hat >> >> On Oct 23, 2013, at 6:43 PM, Alena Prokharchyk < >> alena.prokharc...@citrix.com> wrote: >> >>> Filed >>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4942 >>> >>> -Alena. >>> >>> From: Prachi Damle <prachi.da...@citrix.com<mailto: >> prachi.da...@citrix.com>> >>> Date: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 2:04 PM >>> To: Alena Prokharchyk <alena.prokharc...@citrix.com<mailto: >> alena.prokharc...@citrix.com>>, "dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto: >> dev@cloudstack.apache.org>" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto: >> dev@cloudstack.apache.org>> >>> Subject: RE: Tags on storagePool >>> >>> Alena, >>> >>> I don’t know why it was designed this way in first place – a design like >> host_tags where we have separate table to store tags is much better for >> Allocators to work on. >>> >>> It is a bug, but will cause problem only if we land up with situation >> explained below: >>> >>> Given the existing design of storage tags, the Allocators search the >> details table using the name = <tag-provided-in-disk-offering> and value >> =true >>> Thus this will cause a problem in placement only if some other storage >> pool detail happen to have the same ‘name’ as a storage-tag and also a >> value = true. >>> >>> -Prachi >>> >>> From: Alena Prokharchyk >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 1:36 PM >>> To: Prachi Damle; dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto: >> dev@cloudstack.apache.org> >>> Subject: Tags on storagePool >>> >>> I came across a potential bug in the way allocators do volumes placement >> on storage, based on storage tags. Prachi, can you please confirm if the >> bug is real. >>> >>> >>> The tags are passed to the createStoragePool API in form of >> tags='tag1,tag2,..': >>> >>> ?command=createStoragePool&...&tags=alena >>> >>> and stored in the storage_pool_details db table as: >>> >>> mysql> select *from storage_pool_details where pool_id=2; >>> +----+---------+-----------+-------+ >>> | id | pool_id | name | value | >>> +----+---------+-----------+-------+ >>> | 2 | 2 | alenatags | true | >>> +----+---------+-----------+-------+ >>> 1 row in set (0.00 sec) >>> >>> >>> Allocator code assumes that everything stored in storage_pool_details >> table, having value=true - is a storage pool tag. And this is incorrect, as >> the storage_pool_details table is used for storing diff kinds of storage >> pool details - not just tags - that can be later used by various cloudStack >> managers. Like for example we save Storage level config parameters in this >> table ( >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/FS+for+Granular+Global+Configuration+Parameters >> ). >>> >>> >>> The correct way to fix it would be - store tags as: >>> >>> +----+---------+-----------+-------+ >>> | id | pool_id | name | value | >>> +----+---------+-----------+-------+ >>> | 2 | 2 | tag | alena | >>> +----+---------+-----------+-------+ >>> >>> >>> and fix StorageManager to retrive all the tags by the "tag" key. We also >> have to fix the DB upgrade, which can be tricky as we will have to figure >> out which detail is a tag. >>> >>> >>> -Alena. >>> >> >> > > > -- > *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> > *™*
