storage_volumes and cimi volumes include system volumes?

["Koper, Dies" <di...@fast.au.fujitsu.com>]

Hi,

Should/may storage_volumes include system volumes (i.e. the "boot
drive")?
How about for the cimi volumes collection?

For fgcp I am currently including system volumes in storage_volumes
(which with the current mapping includes them in cimi volumes).
I set the :kind attribute (aligned with rhevm) to 'system' for these
volumes.
They're attached to instances and can't be deattached.

The reason I wanted them in storage_volumes at the time was because it
allowed me to map system volume snapshot (i.e. instance backup &
restore).

But when I was looking at the system_volumes collection and saw all the
system volumes in there I started wondering...

Regards,
Dies Koper

RE: storage_volumes and cimi volumes include system volumes?

["Koper, Dies" <di...@fast.au.fujitsu.com>]

Hi David,

Understood, I'll look at removing them then.

So with rhevm, which I thought I had modeled this after, "system" volumes do not vanish when the machine vanishes?

Regards,
Dies Koper


> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Lutterkort [mailto:lutter@redhat.com]
> Sent: Friday, 5 April 2013 9:59 AM
> To: dev@deltacloud.apache.org
> Subject: Re: storage_volumes and cimi volumes include system volumes?
> 
> Hi Dies,
> 
> are these truly volumes (i.e., storage that as its own lifecycle, not
> connected to that of the machine to which it is attached ?) If so, I
> believe they should be included - if they vanish when the machine
> vanishes, they are 'disks' not 'volumes' in CIMI lingo.
> 
> David
> 
> On Fri, 2013-04-05 at 09:38 +1100, Koper, Dies wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Should/may storage_volumes include system volumes (i.e. the "boot
> > drive")?
> > How about for the cimi volumes collection?
> >
> > For fgcp I am currently including system volumes in storage_volumes
> > (which with the current mapping includes them in cimi volumes).
> > I set the :kind attribute (aligned with rhevm) to 'system' for these
> > volumes.
> > They're attached to instances and can't be deattached.
> >
> > The reason I wanted them in storage_volumes at the time was because
> it
> > allowed me to map system volume snapshot (i.e. instance backup &
> > restore).
> >
> > But when I was looking at the system_volumes collection and saw all
> the
> > system volumes in there I started wondering...
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dies Koper
> >
> >
> 
> 

Re: storage_volumes and cimi volumes include system volumes?

[David Lutterkort <lu...@redhat.com>]

Hi Dies,

are these truly volumes (i.e., storage that as its own lifecycle, not
connected to that of the machine to which it is attached ?) If so, I
believe they should be included - if they vanish when the machine
vanishes, they are 'disks' not 'volumes' in CIMI lingo.

David

On Fri, 2013-04-05 at 09:38 +1100, Koper, Dies wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Should/may storage_volumes include system volumes (i.e. the "boot
> drive")?
> How about for the cimi volumes collection?
> 
> For fgcp I am currently including system volumes in storage_volumes
> (which with the current mapping includes them in cimi volumes).
> I set the :kind attribute (aligned with rhevm) to 'system' for these
> volumes.
> They're attached to instances and can't be deattached.
> 
> The reason I wanted them in storage_volumes at the time was because it
> allowed me to map system volume snapshot (i.e. instance backup &
> restore).
> 
> But when I was looking at the system_volumes collection and saw all the
> system volumes in there I started wondering...
> 
> Regards,
> Dies Koper
> 
>