Interesting...thanks!
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:21 PM, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
> That's where I'm not sure. Its been a few years, and we always used vmfs,
> which is more of the shared pool model. VMware wants to have something to
> carve up rather than 1 disk per VM disk, but that doesn't mean i
That's where I'm not sure. Its been a few years, and we always used vmfs,
which is more of the shared pool model. VMware wants to have something to
carve up rather than 1 disk per VM disk, but that doesn't mean it isn't
possible.
We've been building our own custom primary storage, but doing it in
Hey Marcus,
How do you see this plug-in working with VMware?
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:11 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> I see...cool - thanks, Marcus!
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
>
>> Yes, you can utilize an iscsi lun as shared mou
I see...cool - thanks, Marcus!
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
> Yes, you can utilize an iscsi lun as shared mount point. Create a lun,
> make sure your hosts can see it, create a cluster filesystem on it, mount
> it on all hosts, then tell cloudstack about it so it can s
Yes, you can utilize an iscsi lun as shared mount point. Create a lun, make
sure your hosts can see it, create a cluster filesystem on it, mount it on
all hosts, then tell cloudstack about it so it can start creating VM disk
images on it. But if you're talking about a 1:1 mapping of lun to VM disk,
Hi Marcus,
Thanks for that info.
I am not all that familiar with KVM ... at least yet. :) I had thought
the way one would utilize an iSCSI target in CS today for KVM was via
Shared Mount Point, but I could certainly be wrong.
What are your thoughts on the other points I was making around the p
I'm out of touch on the other technologies, but you probably wouldn't use a
shared mount point on KVM. You would use the block devices themselves as
they show up.
Cluster LVM for KVM, for example, gives cloudstack a pool, where it creates
virtual block devices, and those are treated like raw disks
Hi,
Some questions have come up recently regarding the 4.2 storage plug-in that
Edison implemented.
In an attempt to clarify this, I'm sending out this e-mail with my
understanding of how the new plug-in framework will operate in 4.2.
Hopefully Edison or maybe David Nalley (but anyone else, of c
