----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew Cathrow" <acathrow@redhat.com> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 5:15:51 PM
----- Original Message -----
From: "Geert Jansen" <gjansen@redhat.com> To: "Ayal Baron" <abaron@redhat.com> Cc: "Andrew Cathrow" <acathrow@redhat.com>, engine-devel@ovirt.org, "Simon Grinberg" <sgrinber@redhat.com>, "Saggi Mizrahi" <smizrahi@redhat.com>, "Ori Liel" <oliel@redhat.com>, "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com>, "Miki Kenneth" <mkenneth@redhat.com>, "Einav Cohen" <ecohen@redhat.com> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 10:10:37 AM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] PosixFS: GUI mock-ups have been updated
On 05/10/2012 09:46 PM, Ayal Baron wrote:
device is what is being mounted and in the case of NFS is server:path
There is a reason why we termed it PosixFS and not SharedFS and that users can specify local devices/FS's (and there is no reason to limit it).
Note that if user defines a local FS and adds 2 hosts to the Posix FS DC then 1 host will be non-op
Why? This makes some very interesting use cases a lot more difficult to set up. We should allow multiple hosts in a PosixFS data center, and it should be the user's responsibility that if he adds multiple hosts, that each of those see the same data.
I *think* we're saying the same thing. If you have multiple hosts in a datacenter with PosixFS then it's your responsibility to make sure that they can all see the same storage
+1. I believe that Ayal didn't mean that we should limit the number of Hosts in a PosixFS DC to 1; all he said is that in case the user has defined more than 1 Host in a PosixFS DC and the PosixFS storage domain in it happens to be a local one (i.e. local on one of the Hosts in the DC), all other Hosts will become Non Operational (simply because they won't be able to reach that storage domain).
Regards, Geert