Re: [Engine-devel] [vdsm] Storage Device Management in VDSM and oVirt

>>> So although I believe that when we create a gluster volume or an >>> ovirt storage domain then indeed we shouldn't need a lot of low >>> level commands, but it would appear to me that not allowing for >>> more control when needed is not going to work and that there are >>> enough use cases which do not involve a gluster volume nor a >>> storage domain to warrant this to be generic. >> I'm not against more control; I'm against uncontrollable API such as >> runThisLvmCommandAsRoot() > I can't argue with this. > I think what we're missing here though is something similar to > setupNetworks which would solve the problem. Not have 100 verbs > (createPartition, createFS, createVG, createLV, setupRaid,...) but > rather have setupStorage (better name suggestions are welcome) which > would get the list of objects to use and the final configuration to > setup. > > This way we'd have a 2 stage process: > 1. setupStorage (generic) I was looking up on the VDSM archives and there are talks of using libstoragemgmt (lsm) under VDSM. I was wondering if the setupStorage would be something where lsm would be used to do the work, it seems fit for purpose here.

_______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel