On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 03:34:29PM +0530, Prasanna Kalever wrote: > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 10:13 AM, Niels de Vos <ndevos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 12:06:00PM -0400, Luis Pabón wrote: > >> Very good points. Thanks Prasanna for putting this together. I agree with > >> your comments in that Heketi is the high level abstraction API and it should have > >> an API similar of what is described by Prasanna. > >> > >> I definitely do not think any File Api should be available in Heketi, > >> because that is an implementation of the Block API. The Heketi API should > >> be similar to something like OpenStack Cinder. > >> > >> I think that the actual management of the Volumes used for Block storage > >> and the files in them should be all managed by Heketi. How they are > >> actually created is still to be determined, but we could have Heketi > >> create them, or have helper programs do that. > > > > Maybe a tool like qemu-img? If whatever iscsi service understand the > > format (at the very least 'raw'), you could get functionality like > > snapshots pretty simple. > > Niels, > > This is brilliant and subset of the Idea falls in one among my > thoughts, only concern is about building dependencies of qemu with > Heketi. > But at an advantage of easy and cool snapshots solution. And well tested as I understand that oVirt is moving to use qemu-img as well. Other tools are able to use the qcow2 format, maybe the iscsi servce that gets used does so too. Has there already been a decision on what Heketi will configure as iscsi service? I am aware of the tgt [1] and LIO/TCMU [2] projects. Niels 1. http://stgt.sourceforge.net/ 2. https://github.com/open-iscsi/tcmu-runner http://blog.gluster.org/2016/04/using-lio-with-gluster/ > > -- > Prasanna > > > > > Niels > > > > > >> We also need to document the exact workflow to enable a file in > >> a Gluster volume to be exposed as a block device. This will help > >> determine where the creation of the file could take place. > >> > >> We can capture our decisions from these discussions in the > >> following page: > >> > >> https://github.com/heketi/heketi/wiki/Proposed-Changes > >> > >> - Luis > >> > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Humble Chirammal" <hchiramm@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> To: "Raghavendra Talur" <rtalur@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> Cc: "Prasanna Kalever" <pkalever@xxxxxxxxxx>, "gluster-devel" <gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Stephen Watt" <swatt@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Luis Pabon" <lpabon@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Michael Adam" <madam@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Ramakrishna Yekulla" <rreddy@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Mohamed Ashiq Liyazudeen" <mliyazud@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 2:23:39 AM > >> Subject: Re: [Heketi] Block store related API design discussion > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> | From: "Raghavendra Talur" <rtalur@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> | To: "Prasanna Kalever" <pkalever@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> | Cc: "gluster-devel" <gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Stephen Watt" <swatt@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Luis Pabon" <lpabon@xxxxxxxxxx>, > >> | "Michael Adam" <madam@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Humble Chirammal" <hchiramm@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Ramakrishna Yekulla" > >> | <rreddy@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Mohamed Ashiq Liyazudeen" <mliyazud@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> | Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 11:08:44 AM > >> | Subject: Re: [Heketi] Block store related API design discussion > >> | > >> | On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 11:30 PM, Prasanna Kalever <pkalever@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> | wrote: > >> | > >> | > Hi all, > >> | > > >> | > This mail is open for discussion on gluster block store integration with > >> | > heketi and its REST API interface design constraints. > >> | > > >> | > > >> | > ___ Volume Request ... > >> | > | > >> | > | > >> | > PVC claim -> Heketi --->| > >> | > | > >> | > | > >> | > | > >> | > | > >> | > | __ BlockCreate > >> | > | | > >> | > | |__ BlockInfo > >> | > | | > >> | > |___ Block Request (APIS)-> |__ BlockResize > >> | > | > >> | > |__ BlockList > >> | > | > >> | > |__ BlockDelete > >> | > > >> | > Heketi will have block API and volume API, when user submit a Persistent > >> | > volume claim, Kubernetes provisioner based on the storage class(from PVC) > >> | > talks to heketi for storage, heketi intern calls block or volume API's > >> | > based on request. > >> | > > >> | > >> | This is probably wrong. It won't be Heketi calling block or volume APIs. It > >> | would be Kubernetes calling block or volume API *of* Heketi. > >> | > >> | > >> | > With my limited understanding, heketi currently creates clusters from > >> | > provided nodes, creates volumes and handover them to the user. > >> | > For block related API's, it has to deal with files right ? > >> | > > >> | > Here is how block API's look like in short- > >> | > Create: heketi has to create file in the volume and export it as a iscsi > >> | > target device and hand it over to user. > >> | > Info: show block stores information across all the clusters, connection > >> | > info, size etc. > >> | > resize: resize the file in the volume, refresh connections from initiator > >> | > side > >> | > List: List the connections > >> | > Delete: logout the connections and delete the file in the gluster volume > >> | > > >> | > Couple of questions: > >> | > 1. Should Block API have sub API's such as FileCreate, FileList, > >> | > FileResize, File delete and etc then get it used in Block API as they > >> | > mostly deal with files. > >> | > > >> | > >> | IMO, Heketi should not expose any File related API. It should only have > >> | APIs to service request for block devices; how the block devices are > >> | created and modified is an implementation detail. > >> | > >> | > >> | > 2. How do we create the actual file in the volume, meaning using FUSE > >> | > mount (which may involve an extra process running) or gfapi, again if gfapi > >> | > should we go with c API's, python bindings or go bindings ? > >> | > > >> | 3. Should we get targetcli related (LUN exporting) setup done from heketi > >> | > or do we seek help from gdeploy for this ? > >> | > > >> | > >> | I would prefer to either have it in Heketi or in Kubernetes. If the API in > >> | Heketi promises just the creation of block device, then the rest of the > >> | implementation should be in Kubernetes(the export part). If the API in > >> | Heketi promises create and export both, I would say Heketi should have the > >> | implementation within itself. > >> | > >> | > >> > >> IMO, we should not think about how the clients ( ex: k8s) use it, because there may be different clients. > >> We should concentrate mainly on 'in/out' of block API in Heketi. Regardless of which client, the API should act the same way. > >> > >> --Humble > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Gluster-devel mailing list > >> Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx > >> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Gluster-devel mailing list > > Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx > > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
