<p dir="ltr"></p>
<p dir="ltr">On Oct 4, 2016 11:11 AM, "Nicolas Ecarnot" <<a href="mailto:nicolas@ecarnot.net">nicolas@ecarnot.net</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Hello,<br>
><br>
> Sending this here to share knowledge.<br>
><br>
> Here is what I learned from many BZ and mailing list posts readings. I'm not working at Redhat, so please correct me if I'm wrong.<br>
><br>
> We are using thin-provisioned block storage LUNs (Equallogic), on which oVirt is creating numerous Logical Volumes, and we're very happy with it.<br>
> When oVirt is removing a virtual disk, the SAN is not informed, because the LVM layer is not sending the "issue_discard" flag.<br>
><br>
> /etc/lvm/lvm.conf is not the natural place to try to change this parameter, as VDSM is not using it.<br>
><br>
> Efforts are presently made to include issue_discard setting support directly into vdsm.conf, first on a datacenter scope (4.0.x), then per storage domain (4.1.x) and maybe via a web GUI check-box. Part of the effort is to make sure every bit of a planned to be removed LV get wiped out. Part is to inform the block storage side about the deletion, in case of thin provisioned LUNs.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Our implementation will be independent of the LVM setting issue_discard, will not be based on it and it won't be needed. <br>
Y. </p>
<p dir="ltr">><br>
> <a href="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1342919">https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1342919</a><br>
> <a href="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=981626">https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=981626</a><br>
><br>
> -- <br>
> Nicolas ECARNOT<br>
><br>
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 2:24 PM, Nicolas Ecarnot <<a href="mailto:nicolas@ecarnot.net">nicolas@ecarnot.net</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Yaniv,<br>
>><br>
>> As a pure random way of web surfing, I found that you posted on twitter an information about DISCARD support. (<a href="https://twitter.com/YanivKaul/status/773513216664174592">https://twitter.com/YanivKaul/status/773513216664174592</a>)<br>
>><br>
>> I did not dig any further, but has it any relation with the fact that so far, oVirt did not reclaim lost storage space amongst its logical volumes of its storage domains?<br>
>><br>
>> A BZ exist about this, but one was told no work would be done about it until 4.x.y, so now we're there, I was wondering if you knew more?<br>
><br>
><br>
> Feel free to send such questions on the mailing list (ovirt users or devel), so other will be able to both chime in and see the response.<br>
> We've supported a custom hook for enabling discard per disk (which is only relevant for virtio-SCSI and IDE) for some versions now (3.5 I believe).<br>
> We are planning to add this via a UI and API in 4.1.<br>
> In addition, we are looking into discard (instead of wipe after delete, when discard is also zero'ing content) as well as discard when removing LVs.<br>
> See:<br>
> <a href="http://www.ovirt.org/develop/release-management/features/storage/pass-discard-from-guest-to-underlying-storage/">http://www.ovirt.org/develop/release-management/features/storage/pass-discard-from-guest-to-underlying-storage/</a><br>
> <a href="http://www.ovirt.org/develop/release-management/features/storage/wipe-volumes-using-blkdiscard/">http://www.ovirt.org/develop/release-management/features/storage/wipe-volumes-using-blkdiscard/</a><br>
> <a href="http://www.ovirt.org/develop/release-management/features/storage/discard-after-delete/">http://www.ovirt.org/develop/release-management/features/storage/discard-after-delete/</a><br>
><br>
> Y.<br>
> <br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Best,<br>
>><br>
>> -- <br>
>> Nicolas ECARNOT<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Users mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Users@ovirt.org">Users@ovirt.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users">http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users</a><br>
></p>