So what would be the best way to do it? I use templates to make it simple for 
my users so that the Xen tools are already installed as an example.

Regards,
Marty Godsey

-----Original Message-----
From: Yiping Zhang [mailto:yzh...@marketo.com] 
Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2016 7:55 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: storage affinity groups

Well, using tags leads to proliferation of templates or service offerings etc. 
It is not very scalable and gets out of hand very quickly.

Yiping

On 9/8/16, 4:25 PM, "Marty Godsey" <ma...@gonsource.com> wrote:

    I do this by using storage tags. As an example I have some templates that 
are either created on SSD or magnetic storage. The template has a storage tag 
associated with it and then I assigned the appropriate storage tag to the 
primary storage.
    
    Regards,
    Marty Godsey
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Tutkowski, Mike [mailto:mike.tutkow...@netapp.com] 
    Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2016 7:16 PM
    To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
    Subject: Re: storage affinity groups
    
    If one doesn't already exist, you can write a custom storage allocator to 
handle this scenario.
    
    > On Sep 8, 2016, at 4:25 PM, Yiping Zhang <yzh...@marketo.com> wrote:
    > 
    > Hi,  Devs:
    > 
    > We all know how (anti)-host affinity group works in CloudStack,  I am 
wondering if there is a similar concept for (anti)-storage affinity group?
    > 
    > The use case is as this:  in a setup with just one (somewhat) unreliable 
primary storage, if the primary storage is off line, then all VM instances 
would be impacted. Now if we have two primary storage volumes for the cluster, 
then when one of them goes offline, only half of VM instances would be impacted 
(assuming the VM instances are evenly distributed between the two primary 
storage volumes).  Thus, the (anti)-storage affinity groups would make sure 
that instance's disk volumes are distributed among available primary storage 
volumes just like (anti)-host affinity groups would distribute instances among 
hosts.
    > 
    > Does anyone else see the benefits of anti-storage affinity groups?
    > 
    > Yiping
    

Reply via email to