8:18 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Einav Cohen" <ecohen(a)redhat.com>
To: "Andrew Cathrow" <acathrow(a)redhat.com>
Cc: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org, "Simon Grinberg" <sgrinber(a)redhat.com>,
"Saggi Mizrahi" <smizrahi(a)redhat.com>, "Geert
Jansen" <gjansen(a)redhat.com>, "Ori Liel" <oliel(a)redhat.com>,
"Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Ayal Baron"
<abaron(a)redhat.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 1:12:06 PM
Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] PosixFS: GUI mock-ups have been updated
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Andrew Cathrow" <acathrow(a)redhat.com>
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 8:03:16 PM
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Einav Cohen" <ecohen(a)redhat.com>
> > To: "Andrew Cathrow" <acathrow(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org, "Simon Grinberg"
> > <sgrinber(a)redhat.com>,
> > "Saggi Mizrahi" <smizrahi(a)redhat.com>, "Geert
> > Jansen" <gjansen(a)redhat.com>, "Ori Liel"
<oliel(a)redhat.com>,
> > "Yair
> > Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Ayal Baron"
> > <abaron(a)redhat.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 1:01:20 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] PosixFS: GUI mock-ups have been
> > updated
> >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Andrew Cathrow" <acathrow(a)redhat.com>
> > > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 6:06:23 PM
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Einav Cohen" <ecohen(a)redhat.com>
> > > > To: "Andrew Cathrow" <acathrow(a)redhat.com>,
"Geert Jansen"
> > > > <gjansen(a)redhat.com>, "Ori Liel"
<oliel(a)redhat.com>, "Yair
> > > > Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Ayal Baron"
> > > > <abaron(a)redhat.com>
> > > > Cc: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org, "Simon Grinberg"
> > > > <sgrinber(a)redhat.com>,
> > > > "Saggi Mizrahi" <smizrahi(a)redhat.com>
> > > > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 10:56:09 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] PosixFS: GUI mock-ups have been
> > > > updated
> > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Andrew Cathrow" <acathrow(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 4:57:44 PM
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: "Einav Cohen" <ecohen(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > To: "Saggi Mizrahi" <smizrahi(a)redhat.com>,
"Yair
> > > > > > Zaslavsky"
> > > > > > <yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > Cc: "Haim Ateya" <hateya(a)redhat.com>,
"Eldan Hildesheim"
> > > > > > <info(a)eldanet.com>, engine-devel(a)ovirt.org,
"Eldan
> > > > > > Hildesheim" <ehildesh(a)redhat.com>, "Simon
Grinberg"
> > > > > > <sgrinber(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 9:51:32 AM
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] PosixFS: GUI mock-ups have
> > > > > > been
> > > > > > updated
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > From: "Saggi Mizrahi"
<smizrahi(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 4:39:49 PM
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I do express that empty mount options SHOULD NOT send
> > > > > > > an
> > > > > > > empty
> > > > > > > string, rather, omit the whole argument.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes, this should be handled on the backend side (Yair -
> > > > > > please
> > > > > > note,
> > > > > > maybe it is already implemented like this - don't
know):
> > > > > > When
> > > > > > getting a null-or-empty "mount options" value
from the
> > > > > > client,
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > backend needs to make sure to *not* set the relevant
> > > > > > parameter
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > the vdsm verb at all.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So leaving the "mount options" text-box empty in
the GUI
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > legal,
> > > > > > only needs to be handled in a certain way in the backend.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > In theory for a PosixFS file system a user could create
> > > > > multiple
> > > > > storage domains of different PosixFS types. Perhaps that's
> > > > > not
> > > > > a
> > > > > problem, but worth noting.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is "Path" the correct term to use for the remote
mount? I
> > > > > can
> > > > > imagine
> > > > > customers thinking that is local and messing with fstab.
> > > > > Not sure if there's a better term - filesystem URI ?
> > > >
> > > > - In the initial mock-up, it was called "Mount Spec". Is
it
> > > > better?
> > >
> > > I don't like any of the options - but have a preference for
> > > Filesystem URI, but I'd like others to weigh in here.
> > > My concern with path is that it could mean local or remote, so
> > > another option is "Remote Path"
> >
> > But it *can* be local or remote, so why "Remote Path"?
"Path"
> > actually sounds like a good term.
> >
>
> Can it be local - do we want a user mounting a local filesystem?
If it is possible - I don't see why limiting it. It should be similar
to defining a "Local on Host" storage domain IIUC. Even if it is
potentially harmful for some reason, we don't want to nanny the
user, right? He should know what he is doing.
I'm not saying we should stop them, we should make it clear how this is going to be
used.
When we're setting up a storage domain it's shared storage.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > - Note that the current PosixFS implementation in the
> > > > rest-api
> > > > utilizes the already-existing "<path>" property
within the
> > > > "<storage>" tag within the
"<storage_domain>" rest-api
> > > > business
> > > > entity, therefore I put in the mockup the same term.
> > > > Do you think that the rest-api should have a different term
> > > > as
> > > > well?
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I presume we are doing just not-null validation for path.
> > > > >
> > > > > Obviously we can't validate the mount options but how good
> > > > > is
> > > > > the
> > > > > error reporting back going to be - if the mount options are
> > > > > wrong,
> > > > > or if something fails with the mount will we see "error
> > > > > 12345"
> > > > > in
> > > > > the UI and require the user to go digging in vdsm logs or
> > > > > are
> > > > > we
> > > > > going to pull back and display toe complete message.
> > > >
> > > > Depends on backend/vdsm; Yair/Ayal?
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > From: "Einav Cohen"
<ecohen(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > > To: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>, "Ayal
> > > > > > > > Baron"
> > > > > > > > <abaron(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > > Cc: "Saggi Mizrahi"
<smizrahi(a)redhat.com>, "Andrew
> > > > > > > > Cathrow"
> > > > > > > > <acathrow(a)redhat.com>, "Miki
Kenneth"
> > > > > > > > <mkenneth(a)redhat.com>, "Simon
Grinberg"
> > > > > > > > <sgrinber(a)redhat.com>,
> > > > > > > > "Eldan Hildesheim"
<ehildesh(a)redhat.com>, "Eldan
> > > > > > > > Hildesheim" <info(a)eldanet.com>,
"Alexey Chub"
> > > > > > > > <achub(a)redhat.com>,
> > > > > > > > engine-devel(a)ovirt.org, "Haim Ateya"
> > > > > > > > <hateya(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 9:28:31 AM
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: PosixFS: GUI mock-ups have been
updated
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > > From: "Yair Zaslavsky"
<yzaslavs(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 4:21:42 PM
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 05/10/2012 04:16 PM, Einav Cohen wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Please review the mock-ups on the
feature page:
> > > > > > > > > >
http://www.ovirt.org/wiki/Features/PosixFSConnection#Changes_in_GUI
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Comments are welcome.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > From talking to Haim I understood that path
should
> > > > > > > > > include
> > > > > > > > > ":"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > From talking to Ayal, the path can be similar in
its
> > > > > > > > format
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > path
> > > > > > > > provided when creating an NFS storage domain
(e.g.
> > > > > > > > "server:/dir1/dir2"), *or* to a path
provided when
> > > > > > > > creating
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > Local
> > > > > > > > storage domain (e.g. "/tmp/dir3"),
meaning, without
> > > > > > > > ":".
> > > > > > > > @Ayal - any chance for a clarification here?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > In addition - if we only support V1, why add
the
> > > > > > > > > combo
> > > > > > > > > box?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We are always showing the combo-box, even if we
have
> > > > > > > > only
> > > > > > > > one
> > > > > > > > option
> > > > > > > > in it (so the user will know what is the value
that
> > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > being
> > > > > > > > sent).
> > > > > > > > However, we disable it. I updated the mock-up to
> > > > > > > > clarify
> > > > > > > > this.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ----
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > Einav
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Engine-devel mailing list
> > > > > > > Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
> > > > > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Engine-devel mailing list
> > > > > > Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
> > > > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
> > > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Engine-devel mailing list
> > > > > Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
> > > > > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>