On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 08:24:04AM -0700, Johannes Erdfelt wrote: > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014, Andrew Laski <andrew.la...@rackspace.com> wrote: > > > > On 06/13/2014 10:53 AM, Johannes Erdfelt wrote: > > >On Fri, Jun 13, 2014, Russell Bryant <rbry...@redhat.com> wrote: > > >>On 06/13/2014 09:22 AM, Day, Phil wrote: > > >>>I guess the question I’m really asking here is: “Since we know resize > > >>>down won’t work in all cases, and the failure if it does occur will be > > >>>hard for the user to detect, should we just block it at the API layer > > >>>and be consistent across all Hypervisors ?” > > >>+1 for consistency. > > >+1 for having written the code for the xenapi driver and not wishing > > >that on anyone else :) > > > > I'm also +1. But this is a feature that's offered by some cloud > > providers so removing it may cause some pain even with a deprecation > > cycle. > > Yeah, that's the hard part about this. > > On the flip side, supporting it going forward will be a pain too. > > The xenapi implementation only works on ext[234] filesystems. That rules > out *BSD, Windows and Linux distributions that don't use ext[234]. RHEL7 > defaults to XFS for instance.
Presumably it'll have a hard time if the guest uses LVM for its image or does luks encryption, or anything else that's more complex than just a plain FS in a partition. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
