1:25 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>
To: "Daniel Erez" <derez(a)redhat.com>
Cc: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
Sent: Thursday, February 2, 2012 9:08:56 AM
Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Floating Disk feature description
On 02/01/2012 07:04 PM, Daniel Erez wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Floating Disk feature description Wiki page:
> http://www.ovirt.org/wiki/Features/DetailedFloatingDisk
some questions/notes:
1. why do you need a floating/not floating state? isn't a disk
floating
if it was detached from all VMs?
or is that only a helper property to optimize lookups?
Yes, the floating state is an indication whether the disk is attached to any VM.
It's not a persistent property on the disk, but rather a DB view calculated value.
2. you mention fields of disks (Floating/Shared/Managed)
2.1 do we have a definition of "Managed" disk somewhere?
I assume unmanaged would be a direct LUN, but i think we need a
better
terminology here.
Indeed, we're looking for a better teminology. Suggestions are welcomed...
2.2 same goes for "floating" actually... do we really want to tell
the
user the disk is "floating"?
I guess suggestion welcome for a better name.
"unattached" has been mentioned once as an alternative.
2.3 finally, for shared, maybe more interesting is number of VMs the
disk is connected to, rather than just a boolean (though i assume
this
increases complexity for calculation, or redundancy of data, and not
a
big issue)
Actually, as part of the "Shared raw disk" feature, we do want to display the
number of VMs
(and probably a list too) the disk is connected to - in the 'Disks' sub-tab (under
VMs main tab).
Hence, it might be rather simple to show that number also in the Disks main tab
(the list of VMs will be displayed under VMs sub-tab).
3. List of Storage Domains in which the selected Disk resides.
this is only relevant for template disks?
Yes, it's only for cloned templates.
maybe consider splitting the main grid if looking at tempalte disks
or
vm disks, and show for vm disks the storage domain in main grid?
maybe start with vm disks only and not consider template disks so
much?
Miki?
4. "Templates (visible for disks that reside in templates) List of
Templates to which the selected Disk is attached. "
same comment as above of maybe consider only vm disks for now.
and also a question - how can a template disk belong to more than a
single template?
Yes, for now, a template disk cannot belong to more than a single template.
However, won't we like to have a shared disk for a template in the future?
which again hints for a template disk you would want another view,
with
the template name in the main grid
5. Tree: 'Resources' vs. 'free disks'
while i understand why separating them - naming is very confusing.
maybe a single node in tree and a way to filter the search from the
right side grid in some manner for known lookups (relevant to other
main
tabs as well?)
For now, we've agreed that sorting abilities in columns is needed for easing the
orientation.
6. permissions not available for disks?
at all?
what do you mean power user would be able to attach them by their
type?
does it mean they can associate any shared disk in the system? I hope
i'm misunderstanding, as doesn't make sense to me.
or is this caveat specific to the user portal and not the admin?
not allowing creating a floating disk from user portal is not a
problem
in my view for this phase.
I assume anyone can add a disk on a storage domain they have quota
to.
who can edit a disk? remove a disk? attach disk to VM (which gives
them
ability to edit the disk)
(attach disk to VM obviously requires permission on both disk and VM)
Since we won't support permissions on disks entities (at first stage),
as a compromise for the power user portal, we've agreed to simply hide
floating non shared disks from the user.
7. related features
- data ware house may be affected by disks being unattached, or
shared
between multiple disks.