Re: [Kimchi-devel] [RFC] Create logical pool from existing VG

On 15-10-2015 13:12, Aline Manera wrote: > > > On 15/10/2015 12:00, Jose Ricardo Ziviani wrote: >> >> >> On 15-10-2015 11:56, Aline Manera wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 15/10/2015 11:45, Jose Ricardo Ziviani wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> I'm about to write a new feature to Kimchi. It will allow users to >>>> define any existing volume group as a storage pool, where guests will >>>> be able to create logical volumes into it. NOTE: VGs already in >>>> use as >>>> storage pool won't be listed. >>>> >>>> I read Pooja's "[RFC] Proposal to manage Physical Volumes on Ginger", >>>> and now I think all LVM code should be implemented in WOK so both >>>> plugins (Kimchi/Ginger) could take advantages from that. >>>> >>>> API: >>>> >>>> Collection: /plugins/kimchi/host/vgs >>>> Method: GET >>>> Returns: list of vgnames: >>>> [vgname1, vgname2] >>>> >>> >>> ACK >>> >>>> Resource: /plugins/kimchi/host/vg/vgname >>>> Method: GET >>>> Returns: dict >>>> { vgname, size, free_size, [PV partition list, like: sda4, sdb3], [LV >>>> name list, like: lv_root] } >>>> >>> >>> ACK >>> >>>> Resource: /plugins/kimchi/storagepools/vgname >>>> Method: POST >>>> data: { vgname, storagepool_name, type=logical } >>> >>> I am little bit confused with this API. Usually the POST is done in a >>> Collection so, something like: >>> >>> POST /plugins/kimchi/storagepools {name: pool_name, type: logical, >>> vgname: vg_name} >>> >>> Is that what you are proposing? >> >> yes! updating: >> >> Collection: /plugins/kimchi/storagepools >> Method: POST >> data: {name: pool_name, type: logical, vgname: vg_name} >> >>> >>>> >>>> The frontend, I think we could have a table indicating all available >>>> devices available for a logical storage pool, for example: >>>> >>>> >>>> Define a New Storage Pool >>>> 1. Storage Pool Name >>>> +-----------------------------------------+ >>>> | mypool | >>>> +-----------------------------------------+ >>>> The name used to identify the storage pools, and it should not be >>>> empty. >>>> >>>> 2. Storage Pool Type >>>> +-----------+ >>>> | LOGICAL | >>>> +-----------+ >>>> >>>> 3. Device path >>>> +-------+-------+---------------+---------------+ >>>> | |device | size | free size | >>>> +-------+-------+---------------+---------------+ >>>> | () | sdb | 50 GiB | 50 GiB | >>>> +-------+-------+---------------+---------------+ >>>> | () | sdc | 10 GiB | 8 GiB | >>>> +-------+-------+---------------+---------------+ >>>> | () | vg_a | 20 GiB | 18 GiB | >>>> +-------+-------+---------------+---------------+ >>>> >>>> +--------+ >>>> | Create | >>>> +--------+ >>> >>> May user select multiple VGs to create a logical pool? Or is it >>> restrict >>> to one by one, one VG, one logical pool? >>> Depending on that, we need to redesign the UI >> >> Nope, my initial idea is to have 1 device to 1 storage pool. That's is >> because users can group many partitions (PVs) into one VG. > > So I suggest to have separated options: one to create a logical pool > from raw disks and other one to create a logical pool from an > existing VG. I see, so we will have: 2. Storage Pool Type +--------------------------+ | (snip) | LOGICAL | | LOGICAL FROM EXISTING VG | | (snip) | +--------------------------+

and, suppose 'LOGICAL FROM EXISTING VG' is selected +-------+---------------+---------------+---------------+ | | device | size | free size | +-------+---------------+---------------+---------------+ | () | vg_a | 20 GiB | 18 GiB | | () | vg_b | 10 GiB | 5 GiB | +-------+---------------+---------------+---------------+ Any other pool type will keep unchanged.

Note: I intend to not list VGs without free space available. What do you think?

> >> >>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Kimchi-devel mailing list >>>> Kimchi-devel(a)ovirt.org >>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/kimchi-devel >>>> >>> >> >