Re: [vdsm] Storage Device Management in VDSM and oVirt

> >> So although I believe that when we create a gluster volume or
> an
> >> ovirt storage domain then indeed we shouldn't need a lot of low
> >> level commands, but it would appear to me that not allowing for
> >> more control when needed is not going to work and that there are
> >> enough use cases which do not involve a gluster volume nor a
> >> storage domain to warrant this to be generic.
> > I'm not against more control; I'm against uncontrollable API such as
> > runThisLvmCommandAsRoot()
>  I can't argue with this.
>  I think what we're missing here though is something similar to setupNetworks which
> would solve the problem.  Not have 100 verbs (createPartition, createFS, createVG,
> createLV,  setupRaid,...) but rather have setupStorage (better name suggestions are
> welcome) which would get the list of objects to use and the final configuration to setup.
>
>  This way we'd have a 2 stage process:
>  1. setupStorage (generic) 
I was looking up on the VDSM archives and there are talks of using 
libstoragemgmt (lsm)
under VDSM. I was wondering if the setupStorage would be something where 
lsm would
be used to do the work, it seems fit for purpose here.