On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 07/12/2012 10:36 AM, Thomas, Duncan wrote: >> We’ve got volumes in production, and while I’d be more comfortable with >> option 2 for the reasons you list below, plus the fact that cinder is >> fundamentally new code with totally new HA and reliability work needing >> to be done (particularly for the API endpoint), it sounds like the >> majority is strongly favouring option 1… > > Actually, I believe Cinder is essentially a bit-for-bit copy of > nova-volumes. John G, is that correct? >
Yes, that's correct, and as you state it's really the only reason that option 1 is feasible and also why in my opinion it's the best option. > It's this similarity that really makes option 1 feasible. If the > codebases (and API) were radically different, removal like this would be > much more difficult IMHO. > > Best, > -jay > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack > Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
