6:17 a.m.
On 12/08/2016 04:19 AM, Maxim Nestratov wrote:
08-Dec-16 02:22, John Ferlan пишет:
> [...]
>
>>> I see what you mean; however, IMO vstorage should be separate. Maybe
>>> there's another opinion out there, but since you're requiring
>>> "something" else to be installed in order to get the WITH_VSTORAGE
>>> to be
>>> set to 1, then a separate file is in order.
>>>
>>> Not sure they're comparable, but zfs has its own. Having separated
>>> vstorage reduces the chance that some day some incompatible logic is
>>> added/altered in the *fs.c (or vice versa).
>> Ok. I will try.
>>
>>> I think you should consider the *_fs.c code to be the "default" of
>>> sorts. That is default file/dir structure with netfs added in. The
>>> vstorage may just be some file system, but it's not something (yet) on
>>> "every" distribution.
>> I did not understand actually, what you mean "be the "default"
of
>> sorts."
>> As I have understood - what I need to do is to create backend_vstorage.c
>> with all create/delete/* functionality.
>>
> Sorry - I was trying to think of a better way to explain... The 'fs' and
> 'nfs' pool are default of sorts because one can "ls" (on
UNIX/Linux) or
> "dir" (on Windows) and get a list of files.
>
> "ls" and "dir" are inherent to the OS, while in this case
vstorage
> commands are installed separately.
Once you mounted your vstorage cluster to a local filesystem you can
also "ls" it. Thus, I can't see much difference from nfs here.
So if it's more like NFS, then how does one ensure that the local userid
X is the same as the remote userid X? NFS has a root-squashing concept
that results in numerous shall we say "interesting" issues.
Check out the virFileOpen*, virDirCreate, and virFileRemove...
Also what about viFileIsShareFSType? And security_selinux.c code for
NFS? If you use cscope, just search on NFS.
In the virStorageBackendVzStart, I see:
VSTORAGE_MOUNT -c $pool.source.name $pool.target.path
where VSTORAGE_MOUNT is a build (configure.ac) definition that is the
"Location or name of vstorage-mount program" which would only be set if
the proper package was installed.
In the virStorageBackendVzfindPoolSources, I see:
VSTORAGE discover
which I assume generates some list of remote "services" (for lack of a
better term) which can be used as/for pool.source.name in order to be
well mounted by the VSTORAGE_MOUNT program.
Compare that to NFS, which uses mount which is included in well every
distro I can think of. That's a big difference. Also let's face it, NFS
has been the essential de facto goto tool to access remote storage for a
long time. Personally, I'd rather see the NFS code split out of the
*_fs.c backend, but I don't have the desire/time to do it - so it stays
as is.
> When you create a vstorage "file" is that done via
touch? or edit some
> path or some other "common" OS command? Or is there a vstorage command
> that needs to be used. If the former, then using the common
> storage_backend API's should be possible.
vstorage is just another "remote filesystem" type of distributed
software defined storage. In terms of starting to use it, it doesn't
differ from nfs - you should mount it and then you can use any POSIX
calls to control files and directories resided on it.
Here's a sample nfs pool xml I have - I changed the source/target path
and didn't define a host.
<pool type='netfs'>
<name>nfs</name>
<capacity unit='bytes'>0</capacity>
<allocation unit='bytes'>0</allocation>
<available unit='bytes'>0</available>
<source>
<host name='localhost'/>
<dir path='/path/to/source'/>
<format type='nfs'/>
</source>
<target>
<path>/path/to/target</path>
<permissions>
<mode>0700</mode>
<owner>0</owner>
<group>0</group>
</permissions>
</target>
</pool>
That is vastly different than what was in the cover:
<pool type='vstorage'>
<name>VZ</name>
<uuid>5f45665b-66fa-4b18-84d1-248774cff3a1</uuid>
<capacity unit='bytes'>107374182400</capacity>
<allocation unit='bytes'>1441144832</allocation>
<available unit='bytes'>105933037568</available>
<source>
<name>vz7-vzstorage</name>
</source>
<target>
<path>/vzstorage_pool</path>
<permissions>
<mode>0700</mode>
<owner>0</owner>
<group>0</group>
</permissions>
</target>
</pool>
What causes "vz7-vzstorage" to be defined? Something from the
'VSTORAGE'
command. I would think that is that essentially similar to how
glusterfs, rbd, or sheepdog uses a source <name> field. Note that each
of those include a <host name='$host' [port='#']/> definition,
although
this vstorage XML doesn't.
Thus it seems vzstorage is really not a "local" filesystem, correct? If
so, then should one really be allowing "local" things like chown, chmod,
etc. to be executed? What kind of "configuration and/or validation of
trust" takes place via vstorage provided tools in order to allow a user
on the local host to access the storage on the remote host.
John
Maxim
>
> John
>
>
>>> Also I forgot to mention yesterday - you need to update the
>>> docs/formatstorage.html.in at the very least and also the storage
>>> driver
>>> page docs/storage.html.in.
>>> In addition there are storagepool tests (xml2xml) that would need to be
>>> updated to validate the new storage pool type. The tests would
"show"
>>> how the pool XML would appear and validate whatever parsing has been
>>> done.
>> I know. Will fix.
>>
> [...]